28-300mm L series

[matthew_dale]

I am new to photography and have bought a 400D. I have the kit lens 18-55mm and a cheap Sigma 70-300mm. After

playing with it for a while I have decided that the kit lens is ok but the 70-300 is not that great at 300. I was

looking at getting one lens I can take with me on holiday as that is where I do all my photography. It would be

much easier just to have the one lens and not keep changing which I do often. This is the only lens I have found

that covers the best range, wide angle to zoom.

 

Would I notice a significant difference with this lens, considering I only have a 400D?

 

The aperture does not seem amazing, only 3.5, is there anything better?

 

If I am trying to photo a butterfly in flight, so moving my camera crazily, would the IS help with this? Mode 2?

 

Cheers

[marcomariano]

EF-S 55-250 IS has good reviews across the net. also, it will not tire you up coz its very light & most of all, it will not burn the bank in you.

[andy_witkowski]

mode 2 is for panning...i this case IS could make things worse (trying to follow a butterfly)

 

By choosing a zoom with large range between the long and short end (in this case more than 10x) lens design will

dictate that something will have to give. In this case it's maximum aperture. Is a f/2.8 version

possible?...maybe, but the size and weight would come into play.

 

Cost is also a factor as this isn't a cheap lens.

 

You mentioned being new to photography. That said it would be beneficial to read up on the role of

aperture/shutter speed/iso and how they relate to a correct exposure and how you can tweak them to get a creative

exposure.

 

One book is "Understanding Exposure" - Bryan Peterson...it jumps right in so there may be a presumption of a bit

of photography knowledge but a few reads of it will help you out.

 

Also there are a variety of online classes (free and tuition) and other books that are great resources.

 

Another suggestion would be the ef-s 55-250 lens. I don't have first hand knowledge but it seems to review nicely.

[jack_dallas1]

I own the 28-300 and it is a great travel all purpose lens. IQ is great and it is good at close focusing. It is a very heavy lens and might not be the best at butterfly work. With the crop factor of the 400D a shorter length lens might be a better solution. I also own the 70-200 f4 and it is reasonably light, fast and has great 3 to 4 stop IS. If you can deal with the weight of the 28-300 though, I highly recommend it for an all-in-one solution.

[tdigi]

Considering the cost of that 1 lens I would suggest other options. You can spend half that much and have a great 2 lens

set up that would give you better results across the range. Usually when 1 does it all, it does everything so so. If you

want great results you need lenses that do specific jobs.

 

To many good lenses to mention, If you like a long zoom range consider a Canon 24-105 L. Its F4 across but a great

lens. Anything with a range longer then this will give you only fair results. Also consider getting ( if you dont already have

one ) an external flash 430 or 580 and learn to diffuse or bounce the flash. If you shoot indoors I cant see needing more

the 105.

[jeff_higdon]

Before you spend $2,300 (USD) on the L lens you mention (where the convenience might be...ahem...outweighed by its size and weight) I would suggest either waiting to see if the rumor of a Canon EF-S 18-200 coming in a few months is true or you might try out the EF 70-300 4-5.6 IS (not the DO version) which is an excellent lens or the very good EF-S 55-250 either of which would serve as nice complements to your kit lens. In those cases, a two lens solution would weigh less than the L alone. But, yes you'd lose the convenience. There are some nice Tamrons available that you should check out also, but they tend to be a bit slow on the long end.

 

Here's Bob Atkins' comment on the rumor:

 

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/rumors.html

[tdigi]

Sorry its Friday and I think my brain is on auto pilot. Anyway for outdoors and shooting butterflies the flash will not help. I

was thinking holiday meant indoor family photos.

 

good luck

[yakim_peled1]

If you can afford this lens you can also afford the 17-55/2.8 IS and 70-200/4 IS. These will be faster, have better range, be lighter and provide better IQ. These will be a much better choice for a beginner.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[William Michael]

I have used the older version: 35mm to 350mmF3.6 / F5.6L USM: it was heavyish, but not burdensome:

 

It was a good one lens solution for a specific job, whilst travelling, for mainly outdoor daylight use on a 135 format

(film) camera, when I was limited by law, to carrying only one camera and one lens. Please take note of the detail in

that sentence.

 

The lens you are considering is heavier (about another 400gms), but has IS and is slightly wider, but you will NOT

have as wide a FoV as I had with the 35mm, because you will be using the lens on a 400D.

 

Also, even though you have IS on the newer version, the F3.5, soon becomes F4 and then becomes F5.6, so you will

be using ISO 800 and 1600 quite often, even outside, to keep the shutter speed up to freeze any subject motion in

shot.

 

I think the lens will have limited use indoors: both because of (lack of) FL width and (lack of) fast aperture. (I pushed

ASA3200 quite often with Tri X).

 

I think you need to look at the rationale for this lens: IMO it was designed for 135 format as a reportage lens.

 

If you can live with the limited FoV at the wide angle when this lens is mounted on a 400D, and your concept is

basically reportage work (and you have no big issue with high ISO), then it will do you good service, because I

understand the IQ is better than what I had, and the IS is certainly a feature that will be used.

 

However I strongly suggest you look at the trade offs you need to make: weight; slow aperture; limited wide angle,

and how these factors will impact upon your ability to capture what you want when you are on holiday.

 

WW

[matthew_dale]

Thanks for that. Maybe I won't buy it after all. As to the new EF-S 18-200 I was wondering, if I go on to buy a better camera, 40D or 5D, is there any point in buying an EF-S lens? Ok the 40D supports it but the 5D does not I think.

 

And where is it against the law to have more than one camera and/or lens?

 

Cheers

[William Michael]

Not `against the law` but `limited by the law`:

 

My luggage was subject to scrutiny and many physical inspections over a 15 day journey as the photographer to journal a group students. We were a journeying through a Communist Nation`s Territory, in 1996: it was prudent, simpler and more efficient to carry very few items, smile accordingly, take the photos as directed and bring no reading material.

 

WW

[jcolwell]

William W (Retired),

 

What's the story behind "...when I was limited by law, to carrying only one camera and one lens"?

 

Jim

[William Michael]

James, as mentioned, simply my prudence and discretion as a reaction to the situation, hence the `limitations` as I

perceived them and what I did to deal with them, in the simplest way.

 

I could have taken more gear: it just seemed to me at the time, not worth the hassle.

 

I didn`t really think that I would be emphasising or inviting comment on that issue by mentioning it, but I guess it is a

curiosity.

 

What I was getting at, was the 35 to 300 suited a one lens solution if one was kinda FORCED to have a one lens

solution . . . I was attempting to suggest two lighter zooms or even two fast primes might be better.

 

But as the question was about a one lens solution I was answering within that scope.

 

I also wanted to point out that the 28 is not that wide on a 400D. And it is my guess that Jack Dallas might have

used the 28 to 300 on a 135 format (i.e. Full Frame) for his travels?

 

Having used the 35 to 350 once I chose NOT to use it a second time in a similar situation, opting for a faster, two

lens solution.

 

I personally do not think that a lens change is a big deal when on holiday and certainly a wider compass, and faster

speed can be achieved by carrying two lenses: though I understand others have different views and I wished to

address those views as best I could but stress what I see as inconveniences and limitations.

 

These previous comments might be useful:

 

http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Nq7N

 

WW

[John Crowe]

Superzooms allow you not to change lenses but image quality suffers and the size and weight become a lot to handle. For a decent zoom range you need a minimum of two lenses. The two I recommend you consider are the Canon EF 17-40/4 L and Canon EF 70-200/4 L. You could simply keep using your 18-55 and add the 70-200. You could opt for the IS version but it is an expensive option and not really required for outdoor daytime photography. You won't miss much between 40 and 70mm but you could add the tiny lightweight Canon EF 50/1.8 for those really lowlight shots or portraits.

[robin_sibson1]

It seems to me to be rather unlikely that there ever was a business case in isolation for Canon to make the 35~350 or its successor the 28~300, and the same may well have been true of the 50/1.0. OK, they were not in the same league as the 'concept cars' that litter motor shows, and Bill's postings show that they were occasionally the tool for the job on a FF body, but as a self-declared beginner at photography you certainly would be likely to be wasting your (substantial amount of) money by hanging the Canon 28~300 off a 400D!

 

What balance are you looking for between quality and convenience? If you are set on a single-lens solution. then it is worth waiting to see if the rumoured EF-S 18~200 IS materialises. If you want quality, go for the EF-S 17~55/2.8 IS and the EF 70~200/4L IS, and add an Extender 1.4x for the extra reach if you need it. If you want an inexpensive solution, replace what I assume is the non-IS 18~55 with the IS version (significant quality improvement as well as adding IS) and the EF-S 55~250 IS. As others have pointed out, 28mm on 1.6-factor gives pretty much a standard angle of view, not WA at all.

 

Photographing birds in flight is a serious challenge. Although you don't need such long lenses, photographing insects in flight can be at least as hard. Even panning mode IS (Mode 2) probably won't help a lot.

[lmwalker]

I use the 28-300L on a 5D and I am very happy with it, except that it gets quite heavy if you carry it all day. Other than the weight, the 28-300L is the ideal walk-around lens due to the extreme focal range and optical quality. If I know it will be a long day, though, I will usually opt for the 24-105L for walking around instead, which while it doesn't have the extreme focal range, is much ligher. The 24-105L is better optically, but I don't think the difference is huge.

 

I use both of these lenses on a full frame 5D, which is where these focal lengths provide the most flexibility. They are not really very wide on an APS camera. For a comparable focal range on an APS camera, you might want to consider the Sigma 18-200 OS, or wait for the Canon 18-200 IS. I have the Sigma and it is not in the same optical category as the 28-300L, but it is much cheaper and really quite good for the price.

 

I know a lot of photograpers aren't very keen on 10x or 11x focal range lenses, but the 28-300L is certainly the best in the category and there really are times for me that carrying a bag full of lenses doesn't work.