I have two cameras with which I am working: A canon rebel 2000 and a canon elan II E. Both are new cameras and I am looking to expand my lens collection and need some recommendations. Here is a description of the situations for which I need lenses. I am willing to purchase more than one.

I need a good zoom for shooting sports, preferably something in the 70-200 mm range or above. Will be some low light situations, looking to spend no more than $300-$350.00. I do not want to use a tripod.

I also need a good general purpose lens for candid photography. I teach journalism and am constantly shooting kids moving around school, etc....the basic lens I have often produces blurred pictures. They are usually at distances of no more than 25 feet.

Recommendation for a good portrait lens - especially for shooting without additional light set-up.

Thanks for any help you could give.

-- Karen West (westk@wburg.k12.ky.us), October 28, 2001

Answers

Karen, I think your general purpose lens needs could be handled very well with the EF 28-135 IS. It's a very good zoom with a nice range and the image stabilization feature comes in handy for low-light situations.

You didn't specify what kind of sports you'd be shooting but you may want to consider the 75-300 f/4.5.6--I believe the one without IS is in your general price range--for outdoor/field sporting events.

For a faster lens for low-light conditions, you will be faced with higher lens costs. For instance I shoot my daughter's baton competition's in a gym (flash is not allowed) using the 70-200 f/2.8 and even with that I have to use 800 ISO film.

If you need a faster lens for sure, you may want to consider just buying the 70-200 f/2.8 and using that for the candid shots you mentioned, and it's also a good portrait and wildlife lens too if the subject is not all that far off. I see also that several of these lenses are now being offered on Ebay probably with sellers intending to get the new IS version--if you don't mind buying a pre-owned lens.

-- Gary Russell (gr_russell@earthlink.net), October 29, 2001.

I use and recommend the EOS 28-105. I have owned the 28-135 IS, and sold it because it does not seem to be more than an actual 115--120mm at its longest extension, and I did not find the f5.6 at the longer lengths very practical. The 28-105 is much smaller, and for me, more convenient. Optically, it's pretty much a toss-up. Some rate the 28-135 as slightly better, but I doubt you could tell the difference unless you use a tripod and examine your negatives under a microscope. I have printed and sold my 28-105 shots up to 20x30 inches.

-- Dave Jenkins (djphoto@vol.com), October 29, 2001.

Canon's 85mm f/1.8 and 100mm f/2 are both good low light portrait lenses, and they are also quite good at other things.

I don't think you will find a good tele zoom that is decent in low light unless you at least double your budget.

-- Jim Strutz (j.strutz@gci.net), October 29, 2001.

go for the canon 70-200 f/4 L. it costs around $550 with the rebate, but it will do what you need it to do. it has a good portrait range, it is fairly fast, it is easy to handhold, has exellent image quality, and will last a very long time. this is a great lens that you should seriously consider.

-- jeff nakayama (moonduck22@hotmail.com), October 29, 2001.

Karen, you can't have it all at that price. A good zoom for shooting sports and some (not too) low light situations would be the Canon 70- 200/4L (~$580). You could also go with the Canon 100-300/5.6L (~$330) but it's aperture is a bit slow for low light or fast action in subdued light. Each offer superb quality, and although they may not fit perfectly within your somewhat unrealistic parameters, they are actually excellent values for the level of quality they offer.

A budget package would be the Canon 75-300 ($180) for shooting sports in good light and the Canon 50/1.8 ($80) for shooting in low light. Another budget package would be the Canon 55-200 ($100) for sports, 28-105 ($230) for general, and 50/1.8 ($80) for low light. They compromise some quality for versatility and economy.

There are compromises all around. You seem to also need fast apertures for your low light shooting, portraits, and fast action. Fast apertures (with the exception of the 50/1.8) would easily blow your budget.

-- Peter Phan (pphan01@hotmail.com), October 29, 2001.