Telephoto (300-mm or 400-mm) for EOS 450D?

Discussion in 'UK Photography' started by Jonathan Campbell, Jul 14, 2008.

  1. I'm thinking of buying an EOS 450D. The specific use will be cricket,
    though I'll use it for landscapes and other purposes for which I suppose
    that the 18-55-mm will suffice.

    1. I'd like a 400-mm telephoto lens. I guess I'd tolerate F5.6, though
    larger might extend my scope to winter sports. Any suggestions?

    2. I see cheapish Tamron and Sigma 70-300-mm zooms (f4--F5.6) mentioned.
    Any good?

    3. I have an old Tamron 200-mm F3.5 with an Adaptall-2 M42 mount fitted;
    would I be able to resurrect that?

    Though this would be my first DSLR, I'm aware of the smaller than
    full-frame sensor and the consequent approx. 1.5 apparent increase in
    focal length w.r.t. 35-mm film cameras.


    Jon C.
    Jonathan Campbell, Jul 14, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. It all depends on how much money you're prepared to spend. Canon make a
    400mm f5.6 L USM and in my experience the quality at full aperture is better
    very often than zoom lenses used at full aperture. With this lens and a 1.6
    conversion factor you get an effective 35mm equivalent focal length of 640mm
    which is probably better for cricket than just a straight 400mm. Even then
    you might want to use a 1.4x converter for much closer shots. For cheaper
    options Canon make a 75-300mm and 70-300mm zooms which gives you a 35mm
    equivalent of 480mm at the long end. My friend uses Sigma zooms on his
    Canon and the results are good so you have a lot of choices really.

    Roger Blackwell, Jul 14, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. Jonathan Campbell

    Bruce Guest

    Here is a cheap suggestion. As you are using a Canon DSLR, you can
    use any of several brands of manual focus telephoto lens and fit it to
    your camera with an adapter. For example, you can use anything with a
    Nikon, Pentax M42 screw, Pentax K bayonet, Olympus OM, Contax/Yashica
    or even Leica mount. All can be fitted with inexpensive adapters
    (available from eBay sellers such as "roxsen") and used on the Canon
    EF mount of your 450D. You can buy either a very cheap 'dumb' mount
    that merely mounts the lens to the camera, or a more expensive one
    which includes electronics that fool the camera body into allowing the
    AF sensors to operate, giving you focus confirmation.

    If you look on eBay UK you will see manual focus telephoto lenses in
    these mounts selling for silly low prices, although Leica and Carl
    Zeiss lenses still tend to be expensive as they are in great demand
    for use on Canon DSLRs.

    [Avoid Minolta, Konica and Canon FL/FD mounts as their Canon EF mount
    adapters have to include an optical element which significantly
    degrades the image quality.]

    Not really. All the consumer-grade 70-300mm zooms tend to perform
    reasonably well from 70-200mm but relatively badly from 200-300mm.

    Yes. You would need a new or used Tamron Adaptall mount in EOS (Canon
    EF) mount to fit your 450D. This is a good lens and should give more
    than acceptable results on the 450D.

    You might also consider a 1.5X or 2X teleconverter to go with it. You
    can buy several brands of these in Canon EF mount. There was a 2X
    Tamron teleconverter that fitted between the lens and Adaptall mount,
    however this would make changing between 200mm and 400mm a bit of a
    chore, as the Adaptall mount is a lot slower to remove and install
    than an EF mount teleconverter.

    A 1.5X converter would give a 300mm f/4.8. A 2X converter would give
    a 400mm f/7.0. Depending on the brand, teleconverters can be
    optically pretty good, although a good 400mm lens will tend to produce
    better results than a 200mmm with a 2X converter.

    In the case of your 450D, the apparent increase in focal length will
    be 1.6X, because Canon "APS-C" sensors are smaller than those from
    Nikon, Pentax, Samsung and Sony, whose sensors have a factor of 1.5X.

    400mm is beyond most people's limit for hand holding. For shooting
    cricket, a good quality monopod would be a very wise investment.
    Bruce, Jul 14, 2008
  4. Jonathan Campbell

    Bruce Guest

    Sorry, should be 300mm f/5.3.
    Bruce, Jul 14, 2008
  5. Jonathan Campbell

    Paul Giverin Guest

    A good 400mm lens will set you back about £800.

    I know its shorter than you want but the new Canon EFS 55-250mm has been
    getting rave reviews.

    Paul Giverin

    British Jet Engine Website:-

    My photos:-
    Paul Giverin, Jul 14, 2008
  6. Jonathan Campbell

    John Guest

    I have the 450D with the 18-55 lens.
    I also have a cheapish Tamron 70-300 zoom.
    I also have a Minolta 70-200 lens with a Minolta to canon lens converter.

    All these work great. But the minolta has to manualy focused.

    I use a 2x converter which makes the 70-300 into a 180-600.
    To convert these to 35mm film sizes you multiply by 1.6. So the makes my
    Tamron lens from 112mm to 960mm.

    John, Jul 14, 2008
  7. Thanks everyone. Instant gratification and all that, today I bought the
    £580 two lens + memory + bag bundle (incl. Tamron 70-300-mm) from my
    local Jessops.

    The only impression so far, while I wait for the battery to charge, is
    how light everything is. My previous camera set comprised Pentax
    Spotmatics and lenses bought in the 1970s (+ a frustrating spell with 2
    1/4 sq. TLRs).

    I suppose the next impression will be how easy it is to spoil a nice
    afternoon watching cricket.

    I'll eventually get round to buying a cheap 500-mm + adaptor on eBay ---
    as advised. Pity I sold that 500-mm many years ago.

    Thanks and best regards,

    Jon C.
    Jonathan Campbell, Jul 15, 2008
  8. Jonathan Campbell

    John Guest

    Maybe put some up somewhere for us to look at.

    Its been a long time since I used to play the game.

    John, Jul 16, 2008
  9. John wrote:
    Sure, that was my intention, though I'll have nothing that I want to
    boast about to this newsgroup.

    Keep an eye on

    but my purchase seems to have triggered an extraordinarily wet spell and
    lighting conditions that seem to be what I remember as f2 1/30th sec.

    Incidentally, I'm reading the manual, but would anyone like to give me
    cheat sheet for EOS 450D sports photography?

    Specifically, and most simply, with the camera on a tripod and focussed
    and composed, I want to be able to press the button to take a picture
    immediately. Plus, maybe, a burst.

    Best regards,

    Jon C.
    Jonathan Campbell, Jul 17, 2008
  10. That sounds more like doing football in the middle of winter, something I
    used to do including under floodlights. But I wouldn't settle for f2 1/30th
    second (especially as my lens was f2.8 which I left it on aperture
    priority), I would use whatever ISO setting is available to freeze the
    action. I can't speak about the EOS 450D but Canon's are generally not too
    noisy at high ISO settings. It depends on the lighting conditions.
    I've never done cricket photography but the action is a long way away and
    'little figures' don't have a great deal of impact so I would use the
    longest lens you have and experiment. If you are including players at a
    distance from one another make sure you have enough depth of field as well.
    When you take the shot can also make a huge difference and you will develop
    an 'eye' for this over time.

    Roger Blackwell, Jul 18, 2008
  11. First results at:

    and I'm quite pleased, not least by the cup win!

    The 300-mm end of the Tamron 70-300 seems plenty big for my needs.

    The camera seems a little willful at times, but I guess I'll have to
    accept that it does most things automatically as well or a lot better
    that I could do manually.

    Best regards,

    Jon C.
    Jonathan Campbell, Jul 20, 2008
  12. Jonathan Campbell


    Sep 8, 2008
    Likes Received:
    Tamron 70-330mm lense?

    Hi John,
    I have been reading your quotes on lenses for cricket.
    I have been looking at purchasing the canon 450D and a further lense
    for sports, particularly cricket. The bundle from Jessops looks good and have a few questions.
    1. Were your photo's taken with the Tamron 70-300mm?
    2. Did you use the lense at 300mm?
    3. Did you have to use a tripod or will you get camera shake?

    My main concern was the camera shake without a tripod and was wondering if its worth spending more for the canon 55-250mm or 70-300mm with image stabiliser?


    cdturnbull, Sep 8, 2008
  13. Jonathan Campbell


    Oct 4, 2008
    Likes Received:
    eos 450 with tamarin 300mm lens

    Hi, interesting thread, particularly as bought exactly the same package from Jessops - the 450d with the Tamarin 300mm telephoto.

    I have absolutely no camera experience beyond holiday snaps, but I do have access to lot of sporting events through my line of work. Before I mix it with the professionals on the touchline, I wanted to practise.

    I just took my camera to some games, pointed and clicked. Everything is on auto. I wouldn't know how to set shutter speed and f5.6 could be a low quality car race for all I know.

    You can see the results here. These shots were taken 3 hours after I opened the box, everything on auto.

    I'm sure experienced photographers would tear them apart, but for an absolute beginner on a budget, I'm pretty pleased in general.

    The next step is a move up to 400mm. When shooting from the corner flag, the 300mm gives you quite limited options. Any suggestions for a second hand 400mm lens for less that £800? Lots of bad weather and floodlit shots in Wales.
    copamedia, Oct 4, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.