CAnon 35-350 f/3.5-5.6L Any experience with it?

[marknagel]

I'm looking for a good tele zoom lens. Anyone seen reviews on this

lens. I have another post on the 100-400 and 70-200 w/ 2x TC. Has

anyone heard anything or seen a review on this lens? EF 35-350mm

F/3.5-5.6L?

 

Mark

[ralph_jensen]

Plenty of reviews of all of these lenses at fredmiranda.com.

 

A Google search for the word "review" + "Canon 35-350" (or whatever) will

turn up other review sites, such as the-digital-picture.com and

photographyreview.com and more.

[astcell]

I owned this lens with my A2. It is great for outdoors, although I wanted just a tad more reach. It was sharp as a tack, even for a 10x zoom range. Pretty amazing.

[coolmingli]

The 35-350mm is a bit hard to use without the IS, you should consider the new 28-300 IS, the third generation IS really works well, it works great with the 1DMKII, but on my 1Ds, you can see some CA on the edge, not too much CA on the 1DMKII, I think it is because the 1.3 corp factor. Someone is selling a like new 28-300mm on FM for $1850 shipped, I think it is a great price.

[yakim_peled1]

Have you tried a push-pull zoom before? Many (myself included) hate it.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[john_macpherson]

Have one. Use it lots. Have commented here several times about it. Use the search facility and you'll locate my comments.

JOHN

[marknagel]

Mitchell Li, Thanks for the insight on the 28-300. Has anyone seen a photo review w/ pics of this lens? Of how it preforms optically to the 100-400?

 

Mark

[john_baker4]

To be honest I class the 35-350L as the best lens I have.

 

While many will knock its weight, the lack of IS, its slow speed, the push-pull, some will say that it is not quite as sharp as other L lenses, the bottom line is that if you need this range, it can be argued that it is almost the perfect tool for the job.

 

When used in conjunction with either a 16-35L or 17-40L, it creates a simple two-lens kit, which I have found covers the vast majority of my needs especially when I want to travel light. I had thought when I moved to digital (1.6) the relative increase in focal length to 56-560 would be a problem, it was not. This lens and the newer 28-300 really come to life when you have the ability to change ISO speed as and when necessary. I also found that I left this lens on for most of time, which helped to keep my sensor clean when working in adverse conditions.

 

To use this sort of lens does require some changes to the way you work. Yes, it is very heavy and yes, it is quite slow. I found I moved from a shoulder bag to a rucksack to cope with the additional weight. I started to use a monopod when working for long periods, partly to offset the weight, but also to improve stability. I used a lot more flash. When I use film, I tended to go for faster 400 plus, to help keep the shutter speeds up.

 

I have found over the years that this lens has always generated extreme reviews. This is truly a polar lens, not just because it is off-white, but because people tend to either really hate it or totally love it. For what it is worth I think mine is great and almost a classic. I will be keeping it for many more years. If you can pick one up second-hand at a good price, I would suggest giving it a go, you may be pleasantly surprised.

[rpallagi]

Only those who never used one hate it. Lare majority (99.9%) who bought it, will fall in love with it and never get rid of it. I have one. I wouldnt trade it for anything. Picture quality is not as good as primes, but it can do what 5 other lens would do AT ONCE. wide angle, normal, tele, super tele and Macro (at 135 its 1:4!)

 

bit heavy, but not bad. I use it with 10D and grip. Its bearable. 100-400 is not. At least not for me, for longer periods. My most used lens. Without doubt the best superzoom ever... ok 28-300 is here but the price is crazy, and I would think IS makes it heavier.

 

Its sharpest at 135, looses contrast at the long end, short end not short enough on 10D, better on cameras with less crop.

 

Get one if you can, and dont look back...

[coolmingli]

John Baker: although when you go travel, the 28-300mm range is all you need, but this lens is heavy, it weights atleast 4-5LB(35-350 might be the same), it is much heavier than the 70-200 IS and the 100-400 IS, I went to Canada last month with the Sigma 12-24 and the Canon 28-300, it worked out fine but my neck sore, I rather take a 16-35 and a 24-70 instead, one thing good about the 28-300 is you don't have to change lens that often, on a full frame body, you are covered. Below is a picture shot with 28-300 on 1Ds, RAW, Photoshop Level, Sharpen, no crop.<div></div>

[john_baker4]

Li: try some different bag and strap solutions; you will be amazed at what a significant difference it can make. I struggled for a long time with the wrong sort of bag. I eventually tried a backpack, the first one was too small, it did not really fit properly and it killed my back as well as my interest in going out. Replaced it with a big-green monster, which was actually a lot easier to carry, but is so big, that if you fill it fully, you then cannot get it off the ground. I then added yet another medium sized one to the growing set; this was great for shorter trips and allows me to walk and work all day in comfort. This is probably why you can never have too many bags; I have a cupboard full of the things, most of them actually get used. It is all about having the right bag for the right job.

 

As I said in the earlier piece a really good pro monopod helps. When I do a long shoot of 5-6 hours it would not be possible without the ability to rest and let the monopod take the strain, I also generally found it improved my photography.

 

There are lots of great camera straps around, shame that the Canon ones never stay on my cameras very long, actually for some reason they dont normally even make it on to the camera. An extra wide neoprene type replaces them immediately, this also helps, but don?t try running with one around your neck, as you can get an interesting bouncing effect!

 

One final bit of advice; if you do get one of these or the newer version, treat yourself to an Op/Tech Hood Hat. The lens hood for these is fairly large when attached to the lens. I found that when scrabbling around locations, it was a pain to have to keep removing the hood, to fit the cap, to protect the lens, before moving off. The Hat sorted all these issues simply and very elegantly as well as giving great protection against knocks.