Type of lens

Hi all
I'm TOTALLY new to the proper photography world ,I love taking pictures on my mobile and a few people commented that I have a creative eye so I brought a 2nd hand EOS 750D with a zoom 55-250mm lens ,I'm still learning how to use it but getting there.
I took a picture of the super moon and wasn't very impressed with the lack of zoom,I also like taking pictures of the foxes and other wildlife where I live .
Can you please point me in the right direction of the type of lens I'd need to zoom in a lot further?
Please take into account that I am disabled therefore on a limited budget so will have to go 2nd hand
Thank you

 

Thank you so much for taking the time to answer

 

hi Ian as already mentioned the sigma 150-600mm is a great lens for the moon, not super cheap but one of the best lenses for the price, quality and reach.

something i do need to ask is what limitations do yu have photography wise with you disability if any,
i ask because the sigma 150-600mm c is a heavy lens, its alot lighter that others in its class but for me a 52 year old ex panel beater its a tripod only lens, younger stronger people will be able to use it hand held but its got a bit of weight to it.

this brings me to my most used wildlife lens the sigma 100-400mm c, i got this one two 1/2 years ago and its still going strong,
its on the right side of weight and physical size to make it a hand hold walk about lens, its a couple hundred cheaper than the 150-600mm c

it makes a great wildlife lens for small song birds, its pretty hard to beat on price quality and weight.

for the moon it gives good results, the extra 200mm on the 150-600mm though is worth the extra money but you may not be able to grab it and take out wildlifing as much?,

one lens to be wary of is the canon 75mm to 300mm, its the only lens that i know and repeatedly hear as being soft at 300mm end, i mention it be cause its often cheaper and a big temptation, there are some people that love it and get pleasing results, there may be copy variation a foot here so definitely one to test first for critical sharpness if its one on your list.

some other lenses that may come up are sigma EX series, i know there are some fans of these like the 60-600mm etc,
i used to stay clear of the earlier sigmas but i did find a sigma EX ƒ2.8 50-150mm apo os a while ago and the lens was very sharp,
turns out the EX is a pretty decent series, the art lens of its day.

i've not looked too much at the EX series in longer focals because i happy with the two sigma lenses i have for wild life, 3 including the 50-150mm for close to medium range (this lens is bright at ƒ2.8 but not longer reach what you are looking for, got it for indoor zoo stuff)


with extenders like x1.4 and x2 they have there uses, mostly on bright stuff like very well lite stuff in the daytime or bright objects like the moon and some planets, generally on slower zoom lenses with variable apertures they not the best, they will slow down auto focusing speeds and loose some brightness to the image requiring an exposure adjustment
they do suit constant aperture primes well

you will have a better result using a natural focal from a lens vs a shorter one with an extender, some of the better quality extenders will cost you the difference in price between a 400mm and 600mm any way

i use the canon M50, an ef-m mount entery level mirrorless camera below is the moon taken with it at 600mm on the 150-600mm sigma from London uk



and here is the same set up but with the canon x2 extender mkIII, as mentioned one of the times the x2 works ok is with a bright object like the moon




all iages i take are just jpeg, i do understand the benefits of raw but its not something i need for various reason

and to test the sigma 150-600mm and M50 with x2 i tried jupiter and saturn, quite a high ask for a 1200mm single jpeg image


so far its a lens i havent taken out for wildlife due to its need to have a tripod and bigger bag
mostly i take out a shoulder bag in which i can fit my 100-400mm sigma with my M50 attached ready to shoot so i still consider the 100-400mm c a compact lens,

 

a couple from the 100-400mm c on wildlife

 

as for foxes there is a cheat for them, food lol
that was taken with an 18-35mm
my usual lens for day time cemetery foxes is the 100-400mm, but often i have to use my 18-135mm efm lens because they can come alot closer that the minimum 100mm focal (on crop camera)
the other lens i use for night time foxes is a 105mm ƒ1.4, its not very long but its got the brightest apurture i could get vs the focal, i tried the 135mm ƒ1.8 but the extra light from the 1.4 made a good difference.

 

Welcome to the forum. Iannewbie, if you wish to go longer such as a 500 to 600 mm lens you will need stability and for this you will need a solid tripod. From 400mm to 600mm will cost you, so the purchase of a 1.4 or 2.0x extender use in conjunction with your existing lens will give you more reach but the drawback to one of these is they cost the same as a lens and you loose 1 stop of light for the 1.4 extender and 2 stops of light with the 2.0x extender.
If like me you are financially restricted, have a look at old film lenses in the 400mm to 600mm range.
You will need a adapter, these can be procured from Ebay or local camera shop.
You will need to operate the focus manually and the camera will need to be put into either manual or aperture priority. So all the best with it.

 

3 very nice bird images and the fox looks delightful, Caladina.