Further to advice from you guys I’ve just invested in a Cannon Rebel which came with the 18-55 lens. What I need now is advise on the ideal wakeboarding lens (Cannon don't appear to do a "wakeboard edition").

I'd like the same advice. I am on a budget so even if it is "canon compatible" I'd be good with it. I know that people have suggested a 75-300 - is there a decent lens out there to zoom in for wakeboarding at under $300 or do I have to fork out $600? Thanks - I'm learning a lot! <BR>

Your best bet would be to fork over the $600 and get the 70-200 F4. For about half that (and lesser quality) you could pick up a 28-135 IS. 135 with the 1.6X crop camera is really pretty good reach for wakeboarding and this is a great walk around lens. The Sigma 75-300 are cheap and take pretty good pictures, but focus is terrible on them. I use a Sigma 100-300 F4 for sports which takes great pictures, very fast focus, but it is a tank.

I have the Sigma 75-300 and it takes "good" pictures but not "Great" pictures. (it's under $300)I am saving for a 70-200 f4 right now. If I could afford it I would get a 70-200 IS 2.8. This lens is amazing...

its up to you how much money you wanna throw into a piece of glass, but remember that the more money you put into a lense the better it will be. sharper pictures, faster auto focus, etc.

Is the IS function needed or not and is it worth the massive premium

IS is image stabilization, and if you shoot at 1000fps or higher you probably wont need it since the shutter will be so fast that you can hand hold the camera with no camera blur. thats my thought on it. i have one lens with IS and one without and i cannot tell the difference in shot quality (maybe that will answer your question better). <BR> <BR>maybe others will add their thoughts.

I was in the same predicament as you and went with the Sigma APO Super Macro II 70-300. <BR> <BR>I bought this lens for a few reasons but mainly because of my budget. I spent around 200.00 for this lens, while I heard that the Cannon 70-200 f4 is a great lens, I couldn't justify spending that much money yet. I just started to do photography here and there and in my opinion couldn't justify spending that much for an occasional hobby. Now I may eventually want to go to a better lens but for now I have been happy with mine. I just got it and have had an opportunity to shoot with it much but attached are a few photos from my first shots with it. I am still learning the lens and am anxious to shoot some wakeboarding shots with it. Overall, for the price range I think its a great lense without having to spend too much. Check out http://www.dpreview.com/ for some suggestions on a good lens. <BR> <BR>The jaguar pictures came out a little tough since I had to shoot through dirty glass and had a bit of flash reflection. <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/238608.jpg" alt="ISO 100 , AV 5.6, @ 300mm"> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/238609.jpg" alt="ISO 100, 5.6 @ 300mm"> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/238610.jpg" alt="ISO 100, 4.0 @ 80mm "> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/238611.jpg" alt=""> <BR> <BR>(Message edited by Pierce Bronkite on July 04, 2005)

Here is a shot with my Sigma 70-300 <BR> <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/238688.jpg" alt="">

I never got around to thanking everyone for the replies and examples. I may be saving up to buy a nicer lens this fall - as it is I am loving my camera. It is so versatile and it is hard to take a bad shot.

A little insight on IS lenses. An IS lens will allow you to shoot at about 2-3 stops slower than than a regular lens. Which can come in handy when the available light is lacking or if you can't afford a 2.8 lens an IS could help to compensate for a little slower lens.

What about this one? <BR> <BR><a href="http://www.ritzcamera.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10001&amp;catalogId=10001&a mp;langId=-1&amp;productId=30292" target="_blank">http://www.ritzcamera.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10001&amp;catalogId=10001&a mp;langId=-1&amp;productId=30292</a>

You don't need the IS if you're shooting wakeboarding. I have this lense <a href="http://www.ritzcamera.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10001&amp;catalogId=10001&a mp;langId=-1&amp;productId=30274" target="_blank">http://www.ritzcamera.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10001&amp;catalogId=10001&a mp;langId=-1&amp;productId=30274</a> <BR>and I love it.

If i got that lense for a gift wouild it be ok for wakeboarding? or is the IS bad?

<BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/247496.jpg" alt="">

Is this one bad for boarding or is it good? does the IS help for better or for worse?

IS is NOT bad in any way. think of it as an upgrade that you just might not use much for wakeboarding stuff.

I would highly recommend the Canon 70-200 f4L, one of the best lenses for the $$. You can check out my pictures on my site 95% of them are taken with that lens… <BR> <BR><a href="http://www.mytwocentsphotography.com/" target="_blank">http://www.mytwocentsphotography.com/</a>

Canon just announced a new consumer model 70-300 f4-5.6 IS which is an upgrade to the original 75-300 IS model. should be a decent lens.

I'm looking for the lens that Rich mentioned above. Does anybody know when it will hit stores? I have called the Ritz Camera in my area and they don't have it yet.

<a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&amp;A=details&amp;Q=&amp;sku=39 7663&amp;is=USA&amp;addedTroughType=search" target="_blank">http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&amp;A=details&amp;Q=&amp;sku=39 7663&amp;is=USA&amp;addedTroughType=search</a> <BR> <BR>there you go, but I'd reccommend either the 70-200 f4L or a Sigma 70-200 2.8 <BR> <BR>check out the buy and sell forum at <a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com" target="_blank">www.fredmiranda.com</a> <BR> <BR>IMO you are much better off buying a used lens if you want true value <BR> <BR><a href="http://www.shelbydaniel.smugmug.com" target="_blank">www.shelbydaniel.smugmug.com</a>

Why would anyone buy the 70-300 over the 70-200L ? <BR>The L series lens is a much better lens and cost 50 $$ less. <BR> <BR>If your using it for wakeboarding or action shots the IS is not needed. <BR> <BR>I've recently read some bad things about the 70-300 on another forum.<img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/sad.gif" border=0>

The initial reports on the 70-300 are not overwhelming. I love my 70-200 f4, it's as sharp as any Canon lens I've owned. As Walt says IS is useless at high shutter speeds.

I think I have the 70-300 lense. It was $200 something from Circuit City. The f-stop is only from 4-5.6 ... I have no idea what to set my camera on for that lense so I take pictures in sport mode. They aren't necessary the best. <BR>Any tips? <BR>Here's an example.... <BR> <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/258727.jpg" alt="">

The reason I'm considering the Canon lens with the IS is that, for me, it will be my main lens - sports, travel to Europe, etc. I'm worried that I'll have too much shake zooming in on the gargoyles on the top of Notre Dame. Plus, I think that the difference from 200 - 300 would be a benefit. I understand that for sports (and high shutter speed) IS isn't necessary but I don't want to go out, buy a lens for a couple of hundred dollars and then find that I wished I had bought something with other features. I'm certainly no expert though so I appreciate any advice/input ya'll have. <BR> <BR>Is the info you're getting on the 70-300 from dpreview? or somewhere else I should be checking out? I'm new to all this but I can see that it can become quite a hobby! You guys have been a great help!

Liz, That makes sense but I would be concerned about the quality of that lens though.

Ronia, I'd stay away from sports mode and use TV (shutter priority) Set your ISO at 100 for a bright day and your shutter speed at 1000 or higher. <BR>Your aperture will be set automatically while in TV mode. <BR> <BR>Have fun, <BR>Walt

Walt; <BR> <BR>I would tend to say you have some of the best pic's I have seen on W.W. I have only recently started playing with a camera, so My knowledge of what to do with the thing is next to none. I have only figured out that I point it towards the image I want and press the button. Then I hope for the best. I am not sure on the lens I have I know I posted it on the Delta Hangtime pics thread, but just for the heck of it how much was the lens your using (ball-park). How much to you change your settings while taking pics?

Gary, <BR> <BR>Far be it from me to criticize those shots you posted of the Hangtime Tournament (especially since many were of my kid) but I think you probably noticed that some were dead bang sharp and many were blurred. Walt is dead on when he talks about shutter speed. TV mode or manual with a fast shutter is the best way to guarentee you won't get a blurred rider. Auto or sports mode won't necessarily do that. From there many other factors come into play. If you're shooting in burst mode on the Rebel and even the 20d AIServo isn't always fast enough to track the subject and guarentee every shot will be in focus, heck even the 1D or 1DmkII isn't perfect in servo. If you're in single shot AF mode, center AF point only can make a big difference vs auto AF point selection as well in focus speed. The speed of the AF on the lens even has an effect as well. L lenses focus faster then the consumer versions and usually faster then non Canon lenses as well. Unfortunately the only way you'll get a higher keeper ratio is by learning and experimentation. You could get a 1DmkII and still not get great shots a 100% of the time if the settings are off. For example I read every post on the sports forum on Fred Miranda.com about how to shoot race cars and still had a poor keeper ratio when I actually shot at a race with my 1D. Sometimes it feels like the more I learn about this the harder it gets! I wish I had some good wakeboard shots to post but it's been video only for me this year.

i would for sure set your camera to TV and put the shutter speed at 1000. this is fast enough so that there will be no motion blur (under wakeboarding conditions, at least). do not use auto or sport mode. <BR> <BR>the best way to get to get good shots is to learn how to "customize" the settings to fit your needs. the camera doesnt know you are shooting action sports so it wont favor a (very) fast shutter speed. the best way, like people have said, is to set your camera on TV. as you get better you should try playing with the manual settings (so you have to set the shutter speed AND aperture. <BR> <BR>that being said the lens plays a VERY important role in focusing. the better glass you have, the faster it will focus and the crisper your shot will be. now im not saying that you should spend >$1500.00 on the 70-200mm f2.8L, but i wouldnt just go out and buy the cheapest lens that canon makes, either. try and invest some money into a good, solid lens because THAT is what takes the pictures. your camera only records what the lens sees. personally, i think the lens is the most important part of the camera and i would never EVER skimp out on good glass. i guess thats because using good lenses has spoiled me. <BR> <BR>rich- do you ever read luminous-landscapes.com? ive been reading that lately and its got some really cool stuff (and a few articles on video stuff as well). its mostly image theory but ive learned a lot. <BR> <BR>here's some shots i took of Garrett Morris. not sure of the aperture, but i kept the shutter as close to 1/1000 as possible. more pics of Garret can be found on <a href="http://www.dpcfilms.com" target="_blank">www.dpcfilms.com</a>. <BR>canon 10D w/ 70-200 f2.8L <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/258769.jpg" alt=""> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/258770.jpg" alt="">

Luminous Landscape and Digital Outback photo are both great. Nice shots Scott!

Liz I recently got back from Europe. Saw the sites and took plenty of pics and a few photos. I hardly put on my 70-200f4. I mainly had my kit 18-55. You would IMO be better off picking up a little travel tripod for $12 than the IS on the 75-300 with the reviews it has been getting. I also own a 70-200 f2.8IS and rarely take it out on the boat due to its size and our choppy water conditions. <BR> <BR>Gary learn to read the histogram for your pictures. It will help you adjust your settings. Take a test shot, look at the histogram and adjust F-stop or shutter to remove any spikes. <BR> <BR>Walt yeah I checked out wheels and wax and signed up. Now I just need another driver so I can start shooting again. <BR> <BR>

Haven't been shooting much so these are from the beginning of summer. canon 70-200f4 at about 135mm <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/258826.jpg" alt="Dave Brisco"> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/258827.jpg" alt="">

Gary, <BR>Thanks for the compliment but the truth is I'm a beginner just like you and I'm at the point that I can change setting fairly fast now but I still have much to learn like composition, histogram etc. <BR> <BR> <BR>Like Rich said ( the more I learn about this the harder it gets!) There is so much truth to that statement ! <BR> <BR>The lens I use cost about 600.00 at B&amp;H <BR> <BR>El-Dudeorino, <BR>I'll be looking for your posts on Wheels&amp;Wax and thanks for the tips. <BR>

Rich and Walt thanks for the break down but honestly it was like speaking spanish to me. No hablo espanyo. I think I am going to have to look into a beginer class to learn how to operate this thing. <BR>I do see the difrence in pictures your talking about Rich. On a side note is Chris in DS2, looking forward to seeing some more of his riding.

That last Delta series you posted looked pretty good, maybe you should make the wife become the official shooter! <BR> <BR>Yes Chris will have a section in DS2 along with many others. This video will be much longer with more variety/lifestyle.

Scott - I look at the image properties and both your pics of garrett were shot with the following: <BR> <BR>Shutter: 1/800 sec <BR>Len Aperture: f/5 <BR>Focal Length: 170 mm <BR>ISO: 100 <BR> <BR>You gotta love digital for that reason alone! <BR> <BR>

Kung Fu, <BR> <BR>How are you able to get the image properties from a picture that is posted? Can this be done easily with Photoshop? <BR> <BR>Thanks <BR>Kevin

It's in the Metadata, just load any pic into photoshop and pull down the file menu and hit file info.

Rich, <BR>Thanks for the information this will help out allot. <BR>