Help deciding on which SLR lens to buy

[Plasma1]

I am looking for come collective wisdom in helping me decide which lenses I should buy for my camera.I am new to the SLR world having graduated from a Point and Shoot camera.

I just bought a Canon XTI body and the 50 mm 'Plastic Fantastic'. I would like to buy a zoom lens to photograph my kids playing soccer and hockey. With so many choices in the zoom category, which lens should I be looking at?

Any input will certainly help.

[darrylr]

What is your budget? The recommendations could vary a lot based on that.

[Icemann]

I think you need to specify a price range as well since Canon has a wide variety of lenses in many differet price categories. The two sports you want to shoot are the same that I want to shoot and unfortunately they require two very different types of lenses.

For soccer I use my 100-400 F3.5-5.6L IS lens. It gives you great, up close pictures. I also use my 24-105 F4L IS. Notice that both are IS lenses which helps me avoid the dreaded blur from movement.

Shooting indoor at ice rinks is really hard because most are not very well lit and it's hard to get close. I do not have one but I have read a lot of good things about the 17-55 F2.8 IS EF-S lens. Ultimately I want to get the 70-200 F2.8L IS which should work fairly well indoors especially if you crank up the ISO on your camera.

These are just my thoughts. I'm sure some of the professionals will pipe up with other options.

[darrylr]

There are also the 70-200 lenses which range from $600 to $2000 depending on whether f/2.8 or f/4.0 and IS or no IS.

The 100-400 is in the $1400 range and the 24-105 is in the $1200 range.

The 17-55 is around $1100.

Not sure if these prices scare you or not?

There are cheaper zoom lenses of course that may fit your needs (with some tradeoffs) if the prices do scare you.

[Plasma1]

Is a budget of $200 realistic?

[darrylr]

Well my brother has this one with the Rebel XT and seems to like it:

SIGMA 70-300MM F4-5.6 DG MACRO CANON

It's under $200.

[Icemann]

For outdoor photography you can probably get by with what darrylr suggested. You just have to be very still or buy a monopod. Indoor, it will be tough unless your kids play in an arena that is incredibly well lit.

You tend to get a lot of blurring from player movement because the lens above is not very fast. You can try a flash if the league will let you (many do not) but it obviously depends on how far away you are.

[joeyJoJo]

The cold, hard truth is that $200 is not realistic for a telephoto lens you want to use indoors. If you have to consistently zoom all the way with the Sigma 70-300 , you'll be at F5.6, which is way too slow.

Don't be discouraged, tho. My advice is to develop your shooting style with the Kit Lens and the 50mm 1.8 while you save up for a fast telephoto. You'll either enforce your desire for a telephoto, or you could even end up wanting an entirely different lens. Show your spouse some great shots of the kids with the 50mm 1.8 and you may find it easier to justify the expense.

Use this time to save up for what you really want. By the time you get something like a Canon 70-200, you'll already have the ability to take great shots!

[Icemann]

joey's right. Don't get discouraged by the dollar value of the lenses I suggested above. Its not like I went out and bought all that stuff right off the bat. Develop a shooting style and if photography is your thing you will tend to migrate towards these types of lenses over time.

[gordonb]

Lenses are almost a religious (or political) topic.

There are places that will rent you lenses but they are expensive but if you're thinking or spending lots it might not be a bad idea.

A monopod definitely is a good idea.

You definitely want a large a large aperture lens to shoot in low-light indoors. You may want to consider a fixed focal length lens rather than a zoom as you typically can get these in a large aperture for less money.

135mm f/2.8 Soft-Focus (turn the SF off). Price is currently around $450 in Canada but expect it to drop down to around $300 once the vendors get rid of their existing stock. This translates to a 216mm lens with the 1.6x conversion factor on the XTi

200 f/2.8L $750 (should be dropping down to around $700 eventually).

Zooms: 70-200 f/4L ($525 but you lose a stop) or 70-200 f2.8L $1200 (hard to hand-hold)

[talljak]

You need to go higher in your budget a little bit if you want a telephoto lens.
The Sigma 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 APO DG Macro Lens
Is 350 dollars its an ok lens if your are only in bright out doors and or have lots of light available. It also have an ok macro feature in manual mode.
If you want to do telephoto zoom indoors your budget needs to go way way up.

How much zoom are you looking for?
85mm 100mm? 200mm? 300mm? 400mm?

What is your main shooting style what do you photograph the most that will help you figure out what lenses your want.

[Petee_C]

Plasma1,

I use the 70-200mm 2.8IS L on my 30D. It however was not my 1st lens.

I have used it on my almost 5 yr old daughter (somehow, I can't type 'shot my 5yr old daughter) at the local rink in her learn to skate program... I am using it on manual at 1/250 f2.8 with good results (sorry, I don't remember the ISO)

I had cheaper consumer lenses in the past and was for the most part happy with them. I started in grade 10 with a EOS650 back in the late 80's. They are now all sold or traded in.

Now my lens are more expensive than the bodies... I do not regret paying the premium for good glass. It is definitely worth it.

The cheaper stuff is fine for outside,... not so much so for indoors.

P