Good Super Zoom Lens

[Thrusting Duffman]

Hello!

Been awhile since I have posted in here, I apologize for that.

My wife is an amateur photographer and I am wanting to get her a powerful zoom lens for Christmas. I unfortunately do not know any of this stuff so I thought Id ask for some help. She currently has decent zoom lens (I think its a 35-180 or something like that) but it sometimes does not fit her needs. For example, we live near a lot of wild game and they are often several hundred yards away but she cannot simply zoom in enough to get a great picture. What kind of zoom lens can she get that will accommodate this kind of range?

She has a Rebel Xti camera and Im hoping for a lens in a $200-$400 range, preferably the lower end.

Thank you for your help!

[Photo-John]

Less money for long telephoto lenses usually means a noticeable image quality difference. There's a reason good super-telephotos cost thousands of dollars. That said, I understand that budget it a very real limitation and sometimes we just have to compromise

My first recommendation is out of your price range, but I'm gonna make it anyway. This is already a compromise, but I think it's a good investment and it gets good reviews.

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS Lens >>

If nothing else, talking about this lens a little will educate you about what to look for. Blur from camera shake is a big problem with telephoto shots. The longer the lens, the bigger the problem because the shake is magnified. The Canon 70-300mm IS lens has optical image stabilization - that's what the IS stands for. It is a wonderful feature that makes a real difference in the number of usable photos you get.

Most wildlife photographers say that 300mm is the entry-level focal length to get good critter photos. So I think this is about as short as you want to go. And if you go longer, the price is going to immediately jump to $1000 or more.

Here's a similar length Canon within your price range:

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Lens Reviews >>

Notice the rating difference. The more expensive lens with IS has a rating of 4 and the less expensive lens has only slightly higher than a 3 rating. Personally, I don't want anything with a rating below 4. But like I said, I understand budget can't be ignored.

Read the ratings for both of those lenses and let us know what you think. I'm sure you'll have more questions. I'll check back to see what you have to say. Hopefully some more photographers will jump in and share their thoughts and ideas, too

[Loupey]

...For example, we live near a lot of wild game and they are often several hundred yards away but she cannot simply zoom in enough to get a great picture. What kind of zoom lens can she get that will accommodate this kind of range?

She has a Rebel Xti camera and Im hoping for a lens in a $200-$400 range, preferably the lower end.

"Several hundred yards away" is way too far even with supertelephotos (unless you're going for wide environmental shots).

Knowing that and understanding your budget, I think the best solution for you and your wife would be the 70-300 or 75-300 type zooms as Photo-John mentioned. Understand that 300mm will still be short for nearly all tight wildlife shots.

I recommend getting stabilized lenses for all telephotos but I think the zooms mentioned with stabilization will exceed your budget. I can recommend a Tamron 70-300mm that I personally tested here:

70-300mm Field Test

It is a competent little lens with admirable image quality and decent macro capabilities. And it is less than $200. Not sure about the auto-focus performance though.

[Thrusting Duffman]

Wow, thank you both for such great information. I never realized how expensive the lenses can get. Thanks for the recommendations, I will have to do a lot more research.

The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM had great reviews, I am definitely going to save that model # so when I do have more money I can get her that lens.

Right now, I am looking into either the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Lens or the Tamron 70-300mm. They both seem great and the pictures did look pretty good from the link Loupey provided. The Tamron 70-300mm does not have IS correct? The next question I have will probably be difficult to answer but maybe someone can give me a little idea but Im wondering how far an object can be zoomed into with a 70-300mm within a given range, say 50 yards?

[Loupey]

Here's an UNCROPPED shot taken with a 300mm at only 36 yards (33 meters) - yes, I measured it since it was in my backyard. Same APS-C crop factor camera as your wife's XTi. For size reference, I estimate that coyote was about the size of a 7~8 month old German Shepherd and about 40 pounds.


When I'm out shooting birds with my 500mm, a common comment made by other people goes like "gee, you must be able to get good shots from way out with that thing". So they are naturally surprised when I tell them I must stalk small/medium sized birds to within 20 to 30 feet (not yards) before I can take the shot.

[OldClicker]

Here is a reference to show how close you need to be to fill the frame with different animals on a 35mm camera (multiply by 1.5 for your XTi).

http://www.grayowlimages.com/articles/Close.pdf

Resouces spent learning to 'hunt' the species will do a lot more for you than buying equipment.

TF

[Thrusting Duffman]

Thanks a lot for that photo and the info! That was nice of you to measure and provide a good explanation to my question. Thats a pretty good picture for that distance, I think that is what I am looking for.

[Thrusting Duffman]

Here is a reference to show how close you need to be to fill the frame with different animals on a 35mm camera (multiply by 1.5 for your XTi).

http://www.grayowlimages.com/articles/Close.pdf

Resouces spent learning to 'hunt' the species will do a lot more for you than buying equipment.

TF

Thanks for that pdf, I think Im starting to get all of this now.