Hey all, long time a.netter, first post here...
I'm moving to Valley Stream next week and I've been checking out the spotting maps for some good JFK shooting locations... I notice on some of them they say you need a 400mm lens for decent shots. Along with my move I'm also shopping for a new lens, and I'm wondering if that 400mm recommendation applies to film or digital - the 1.6 crop factor on my Rebel XT makes a 300mm lens equivalent to a 480mm on a film camera.
Basically I'm trying to decide between several lenses in different price ranges... I could go for the cheapie Canon 75-300 (or the Sigma equivalent) that retails for under $200, or alternatively if I think I can swing the higher price I'm also considering the Canon 70-300 IS (so I can handhold those long telephoto shots better) or if I do need a 400, the Sigma 135-400. Would one of the 300mm models be enough or should I only really consider 400 and up? (I'd love the Bigma, but no way I can swing $1,000 for a lens right now.) If I do need 400, I guess the Sigma is it.
One other thing to consider is that my new place is right on one of the takeoff patterns, and I've been watching out from my rear deck and most of the planes taking off fly over just to the left before making a sharp right turn... beautiful, and the turn means I have a perfect side view of most planes. Problem is they're probably at around 1,000 feet at that point, so I'm sure the longer the lens, the better. But still, in the film days I remember a 500mm lens being considered pretty darn long... so maybe the 480mm equivalent of a 300 on my Rebel XT would be enough even for that?
I'm not really looking to get all of my rear deck shots accepted on a.net or anything, more just for my own amusement/documentation. I'd probably hit the real spotting points for anything serious.
Bookmarks