Long Range Lens Options

[numbutt1]

Hello All! Im trying to get some condensed input on what are the best options for a Longer range lens. I just got a EOS T3i that came with the 18-55mm lens. Im heading to Yellowstone in a couple weeks and want something to get out there but am getting bogged down with everything I read online, just too much to process in a short amount of time. Do you guys got some suggestions for a Newb? I would mostly be shooting scenery and wildlife but dont know what the best combo is lens, lens+ converter, etc etc. What brands work with what. will auotfocus and IS still work. keeping in mind Im completely green to this and want to stay under $1000 can a few of you guys give some advice? Thanks much

[marcfs]

70-200 f/4 L IS is a great longer lens. 
If you think you are serious about photography this is a lens that deserves serious consideration.  It is very sharp, has great image stabilization and its light weight. 
This is a lens you will not outgrow. 
Price at B&H is $1,299. 

Good luck!!

Marc

[KeithB]

Bob just favorably reviewed the Tamron 70-300:

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tamron_70-300_vc_review.html

I prefer the Canon 70-300 IS, but the Tamron is cheaper.  Either of these would complement your 18-55 very well, and 300 mm is long enough for large wild life.

[numbutt1]

So this kinda goes back to my original question. Will all these things work together? Tamron 70-300 plus a 1.4x??? And what brands will intermix. I know its not the way one should learn etc etc but I am wanting to get some shots of animals in the open that there really is no getting much closer then 50-75yrds. So I read an review here on the canon 300 with 1.4x that looked promising? Im not opposed to buying used stuff either. The guy at the store suggested the 70-200 as well I just dont see it getting out there very far...?

[KeithB]

I use a Tamron 1.4x on my canon 70-300 with good results.  Bob did a test and found that the 70-300 + 1.4x was no better than just cropping the 70-300 image alone, but YMMV.  With the number of Mega pixels you have, you can crop quite a bit and still have a high resolution image.  50-75 yards is no sweat for the 70-300, which in your case is the equivalent of a 480 mm lens on a Full Frame (35 mm) camera.

[KeithB]

You can also rent a lens (or 2!) for the updoming trip, look at the link above.

I also have the sigma 100-500 which gives a lot more reach and costs about $1000.  Bob reviewed the 50-500 here:
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/sigma_50-500_os_hsm_review.html

but it is a lot more expensive.

These lenses should not be considered "walking around" lenses because of the size.  The 70-300's and 70-200 are small and light enough to walk around with.

Here is Bob's article on Teleconverters:
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/tc3.html

[numbutt1]

what about the Tamron 75-300 4/5.6 ? They seem to be inexpensive Im guessing not as good of quality as 70-300?

[KeithB]

what about the Tamron 75-300 4/5.6 ? They seem to be inexpensive Im guessing not as good of quality as 70-300?

I don't know about the quality, but the 75-300 lacks "VC" or vibration control (Image Stabilization in Canon-speak) which IMHO is required for a long telephoto when handheld.