i have found that i do need more zoom than the kit lense can give me. are either one of these lenses a good choice?
sigma 55-200
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...6_DC_Lens.html

tamron 55-200
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Di_II_LD.html

This one's better (or, even better, the $1000 version with IS), but I don't think you want to spend that much. (Honestly, though the 70-200mm f/4L is one of the cheapest "L" lenses, and a really good value.)

I don't have experience with either of those, but I do have a cheap (Canon) 75-300mm f/4 - f/5.6 lens which is probably comparable to those, and it was ... fine, I suppose, but VERY soft at 300mm (and not incredibly sharp at 75mm). I didn't find myself using it much because of that. Those will give you reach, for sure, just don't expect tack-sharp images.

i tried the 75-300 at a camera store, and i wasn't too impressed with it. the zoom wasn't smooth and it didn't focus very fast.

I had a similar question. I was planning/hoping on getting the Canon 75-300 4-5.6 IS as my next lens. Wondering if there are better options in that price range?

I'd like to be able to take pics of the new puppy I'm planning to get in the Spring and capture outdoor sports like Ultimate Frisbee.

You mean the 70-200 4 IS? Or the 75-300 4-5.6 IS?

Well that's a lens [70-200 4 IS] you really get if you don't want the bulk of the 2.8, but want the IS that the regular f4 (a killer deal) doesn't offer. Whether you need the IS will depend on whether you mount the camera, and what kind of lighting you shoot under. You could also consider a 3rd party manufacturer for a 70-200 2.8 instead, as the Canon 70-200 2.8 costs a bit more.

The 70-200 4L IS is a well made lens, and a great choice, it just isn't that cheap and brings you in the range of a lot of other good tele zooms in the <$1000 price range.

Originally Posted by emorphien

You mean the 70-200 4 IS? Or the 75-300 4-5.6 IS?

Well that's a lens [70-200 4 IS] you really get if you don't want the bulk of the 2.8, but want the IS that the regular f4 (a killer deal) doesn't offer. Whether you need the IS will depend on whether you mount the camera, and what kind of lighting you shoot under. You could also consider a 3rd party manufacturer for a 70-200 2.8 instead, as the Canon 70-200 2.8 costs a bit more.

The 70-200 4L IS is a well made lens, and a great choice, it just isn't that cheap and brings you in the range of a lot of other good tele zooms in the <$1000 price range.

something like this one:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...d_i=B000JKJAUW