Jump to content

Inexpensive telephoto lens for Canon? Polarizing filter for Alaska?


Recommended Posts

Please help.  I am a complete amateur, but I would like to take nice photos on our upcoming Alaska cruise.  I am looking for an inexpensive telephoto lens for photographing wildlife/nature. We are going on a whale watching excursion and will also be viewing glaciers and distant animals on shore.  I have a Canon (either T3 or T3i, not sure and I can’t get to the box right now because the kids are napping).  I am not able to handle a lot of complex manual settings.  So what would you recommend?  I have looked at a 75-300 and a 55-250, but I’m not which of those or if something completely different is best?  I want to get one that will give a lot of zoom (some things may be quite far away), good image quality, and stay under $200 if possible.  Also, should I get a polarizing filter?  I have read that they are helpful, but then I was reading that you have to wait until after it focuses to put it on because of movement.  That may work for mountains, but not for moving objects like whales.

 

Thanks in advance!

Edited by Mediterranean_Honeymooner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mediterranean_Honeymooner said:

 

How does one go about either of these?

 

There are a few online vendors - Lensrentals.com is a site recommended over on dpreview.com. For used, keh.com is fequenly mentioned. If you have a local camera store, they may have some used equipment. Any EF or EF-S lens should fit your camera body. It’s a very common lens mount, and a check on B&H photo shows a Tameron 70-300 lens for $129.00

 

This lens does not have image stabilization - for EF mount lenses that is usually found on the next price tier upwards. This should not matter unless you are trying for a long handheld exposure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TheOldBear said:

 

There are a few online vendors - Lensrentals.com is a site recommended over on dpreview.com. For used, keh.com is fequenly mentioned. If you have a local camera store, they may have some used equipment. Any EF or EF-S lens should fit your camera body. It’s a very common lens mount, and a check on B&H photo shows a Tameron 70-300 lens for $129.00

 

This lens does not have image stabilization - for EF mount lenses that is usually found on the next price tier upwards. This should not matter unless you are trying for a long handheld exposure.

 

So this 70-300 would be a better choice?  Do you not recommend either of the other two?  Do you have any other suggestions to look for used?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Mediterranean_Honeymooner said:

 

So this 70-300 would be a better choice?  Do you not recommend either of the other two?  Do you have any other suggestions to look for used?

 

Its a reasonable, consumer grade lens from a well known retailer. Consider it a benchmark price for comparison. I have a similar grade lens for my Olympus (and some old Canon lenses in FD and EF mounts around somewhere). 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, TheOldBear said:

 

Its a reasonable, consumer grade lens from a well known retailer. Consider it a benchmark price for comparison. I have a similar grade lens for my Olympus (and some old Canon lenses in FD and EF mounts around somewhere). 

 

 

 

Great.  Any advice on whether I should purchase a polarizing lens?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the Canon EF-S 55-250mm IS (image stabilizer) , but II (non STM model). It's crop equivalent is 88-400mm which is pretty far (Canon t3 and t3i have a 1.6x crop). This lens is very sharp for it's images. if considering a Canon EF-S 55-250mm do not get the the STM version because the t3/t3i won't be able to fully utilize the STM function. Note that the lens doesn't have a super fast autofocus. 

 

I don't use it often now because I have since upgrade to a professional series lens.

 

 

 

Edited by Gizmo88
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gizmo88 said:

I have the Canon EF-S 55-250mm IS (image stabilizer) , but II (non STM model). It's crop equivalent is 88-400mm which is pretty far (Canon t3 and t3i have a 1.6x crop). This lens is very sharp for it's images. if considering a Canon EF-S 55-250mm do not get the the STM version because the t3/t3i won't be able to fully utilize the STM function. Note that the lens doesn't have a super fast autofocus. 

 

 

 

 

Okay.  This is good to know.  I was leaning towards the STM because I thought I read it was “better” in some way.  But not worth it for my camera?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Mediterranean_Honeymooner said:

 

Okay.  This is good to know.  I was leaning towards the STM because I thought I read it was “better” in some way.  But not worth it for my camera?

It won't be worth it due to the camera being old (when it actually got released) and may not being able to support it's focusing system. An STM (stepper motor focus-by-wire) system isn't the best for image sharpness because in autofocus estimates distance for sharpness instead mechanically doing it an getting a maximized distance for sharpness.

Edited by Gizmo88
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Mediterranean_Honeymooner said:

 

Great.  Any advice on whether I should purchase a polarizing lens?

 

18 hours ago, GUT2407 said:

For Alaska I’d regard a polorizer as pretty much essential.

 

Polarising filters can help make ‘better’ pictures. They can also help make awful ones.

 

For landscapes, removing unwanted reflections, etc., they can serve a very good purpose.

 

However, you don’t just screw them on the lens and forget them. Typically, they require adjustment for each shot. Also, they can have an impact on your light metering,

 

If you go that way, make sure you do a bit of practise at home som you know how it will work for you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/23/2019 at 12:28 PM, Mediterranean_Honeymooner said:

I have looked at a 75-300 and a 55-250, but I’m not which of those or if something completely different is best?  I want to get one that will give a lot of zoom (some things may be quite far away), good image quality, and stay under $200 if possible.

With all due respect, a budget of $200 won't go far enough to make it a worthwhile purchase for Alaska. Rent the 70-300 L-series (the white one) or maybe the 100-400 Mark II for about that $200 and be much happier. If you feel the urge to buy, skip the 75-300; you won't be happy. Be sure that any telephoto you buy has Image Stabilization - you really won't enjoy Alaska if you're stuck having to maintain significantly higher shutter speeds to avoid camera shake.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Re-tired said:

I have used Lensrental a few times and it is a great way to go.  They'll even rent you the correct size polarizing filter to go with whatever lens you end up with.

Same here. Every Alaska cruise we've done has been made better with a sizeable rental from them. Lately I really just rent the 600mm, but I've been all over the map with them. We've tried lenses that we later bought, we've tried lenses that we realized we'd never buy, we've rented stuff we had no hope of affording (to purchase) yet, etc.

 

My tips: have your rental arrive at least a day before you need to have it, so if there's a shipping issue or a (very rare) equipment problem, they have time to overnight you a replacement thingy or you have margin for the shipment to arrive. Be aware that LR does sometimes (if stock permits) ship your order a day early (at no extra cost to you), so if you're not certain that you'd be at the listed shipping address for both of those days, I highly encourage you to have your order shipped to your nearest "FedEx Office" location (LR knows how to do this quite well). You then show up at FedEx Office with ID in hand, sign for your package, and walk out with a smile, rather than fuming at home that you missed the delivery (it's absolutely positively always "Signature Required" so they absolutely will not leave it on your doorstep). Heck, by doing it this way, I've had the pleasure of picking up my order as early as 8:30am and 12:00noon at the latest; the drivers start their route rather close to my nearby 'Office and they want to empty out their truck as early as possible.

 

I'll also point out that their sister site, lensauthority.com, is a fantastic place to buy used lenses. They have better repair/calibration capabilities onsite than some of the major lens manufacturers; they've done consulting work for at least one major brand but can't disclose which one due to NDA. They also have a fantastic system called "It's a keeper", so if you've rented a lens and decide you love it, you can buy it and keep it. Their online system will give you a no-haggle price on the spot; there's no need to send that lens back to them and wait for a different copy to come to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I've done Alaska w/ a 70-300mm on Olympus.  Olympus has a crop factor of 2x, so it's like a 140-600.   Lens can be heavy, and I saw a man on our Juneau photo safari managing his w/ a monopod to help with the weight.   On our Alaska Denali tour, I happened to have a 40-150mm (like a 80-300) and the doll sheep still looked like tiny specks since they were so far away.

 

Another item to get would be a teleconverter.  It will take your 70-300 and add a multiplier to it.  So instead of my 70-300 it would be like 70-300 times 1.4.  With teleconverters, you lose a stop or two of light, so it's better to rent a lens with the lowest F stop as possible, and a good teleconverter.   Also, w/ longer lenses, I've seen several that are higher F Stops, and often you'll see a lens w/ a graduated f stop.  Like F2.8-F6.3.  You'll have F6.3 at the max zoom.   Teleconverters go between the camera body and the lens.

 

I've used lens rentals once.  I rented the lens, then turned around and bought it, so now it's my go to lens.  Lensrentals also has a used or a rent to by option, but I haven't used that yet.  From personal experience, I've bought a lot of lenses, that later I wished I hadn't, so renting a lens is a great way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/23/2019 at 8:47 PM, Mediterranean_Honeymooner said:

 

So this 70-300 would be a better choice?  Do you not recommend either of the other two?  Do you have any other suggestions to look for used?

i have this tamron on my ti6 it works very well, and you can add a polarizing filter. it shoots well stabilization, very good lens. i bought mine on sale traded in a kit lens the total was only $170.00 you may find a deal like i did at my local camera store. below are shots with this set up.i picked a variety, the jets was a super bright day,  as well as the dolphin.

image.thumb.png.7c5e356d660b547622e57c9060daeb3f.png

sun.jpg

1.jpg

2.jpg

3.jpg

4.jpg

IMG_6306.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, knittinggirl said:

Another item to get would be a teleconverter.  It will take your 70-300 and add a multiplier to it.  So instead of my 70-300 it would be like 70-300 times 1.4.  With teleconverters, you lose a stop or two of light, so it's better to rent a lens with the lowest F stop as possible, and a good teleconverter.   Also, w/ longer lenses, I've seen several that are higher F Stops, and often you'll see a lens w/ a graduated f stop.  Like F2.8-F6.3.  You'll have F6.3 at the max zoom.   Teleconverters go between the camera body and the lens.

Be cautious with a teleconverter. Not only is it better to have a lens with the lowest aperture possible, if you don't pay attention to the limits, you won't have auto-focus. Many cameras need f/5.6 or f/6.3 to be able to autofocus, so your lens aperture (when multiplied by the TC's strength) needs to remain under f/6.3 to keep autofocus. Example: a 70-200 f/4 with a 1.4x TC becomes a 98-280 f/5.6, so you'd be OK, but if you swapped it out for a 2x TC, it becomes a 140-400 f/8 and you've just lost autofocus.

 

You should also check the compatibility list of the TC itself. Many times, they won't work on a "superzoom" (the 10x or greater zoom range lenses like 18-200, 18-270, 18-400, 28-300, etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, foneguy said:

i have this tamron on my ti6 it works very well, and you can add a polarizing filter. it shoots well stabilization, very good lens. i bought mine on sale traded in a kit lens the total was only $170.00 you may find a deal like i did at my local camera store. below are shots with this set up.i picked a variety, the jets was a super bright day,  as well as the dolphin.

image.thumb.png.7c5e356d660b547622e57c9060daeb3f.png

 

The OP already has a 55-250 and wants more reach. Although an 18-270 gives a tiny bit more reach, I think this is going in a different direction. It's a "superzoom", a 15x zoom range. Although very convenient for vacationers, it's not really hitting the OP's request. I'd go more in the direction of a 100-400, or if shooting Nikon a 200-500. And remember to rent if this particular lens doesn't really speak to you as something you'd use often. For the ~$4000 I've spent across six Alaska cruises to rent long lenses (the Canon 500mm f/4 v1, 400mm f/4 DO v1, 200-400/4 with 1.4x TC (twice), and the 600mm f/4 v2 (twice)), I couldn't have bought any one of them, and at least when it comes to the 600mm, I wouldn't even have the current model. So for the rare times when I want a big lens, renting really does give me a lot of options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is not many options for a $200 budget. I have a similar camera and I have planned to get a Tamron 18-400mm lens which is around $600. I do have a couple lens that would cover most of the range, however, I would rather pack one less lens and also avoid swapping lens during the trip particularly in Alaska.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Canon 100 - 400 mm L f/4-f/5.6 lens is an incredible lens, but very pricey to buy ($1,700 or so).  But, you could rent it for within your budget.  It should provide all the reach you need (with your crop sensor body) to get you some great shots while whale watching.  These are some that I took with that lens on our whale watching trip out of Juneau last year.

D54_5478 processed.jpg

D1D20172 processed.jpg

D1D23148 resize for fb.jpg

D1D23214.jpg

D54_6885 whale 1538 Smudge or Flame.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/8/2019 at 7:56 PM, GUT2407 said:

If it’s all about budget, the 75-300. Preferably The IS version.

I borrowed a Canon 75-300 from a friend a number of years ago and was disappointed. Maybe newer iterations are better (I hope they are) but even by non-L standards, the image quality was lacking - and this was outdoors, in Florida sunlight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...