edlark Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 I have been thinking of purchasing a better set of zooms for doing photojournalism-style work. I currently use two bodies (Elan 7e and Elan IIe) with some combination of the following lenses: Canon 28- 135mm IS (accounts for about 70% of exposed frames), Tamron 19-35mm, Canon 200mm L 2.8, and/or the occasional wide Canon prime (24mm or 20mm). In a perfect and just world, I would buy a new 24-70L and 70-200L 2.8, but that is just not financially realistic since my photography is a hobby and I'm not independantly wealthy. I have been renting or borrowing the 200mm lenses for events where I think I will need the reach beyond 135, been very pleased with the results, and was planning on picking up a used model for my very own thinking this was a pretty good compromise. However, as I was pricing the 200mm I noticed that there are some very good deals out there for the older zooms. From what I read the quality should still be very good, and since I don't care to advertise my L glass by wrapping it in an off-white package, the black finish on the 80-200mm actually seems like a plus to me. I rarely need the extra mm that the Tamron provides for this kind of shooting, and being able to just carry the two bodies with the lenses attached (with maybe my 24mm prime in a pocket) would be a definte advantage. Unfortunately, the rental shop I deal with doesn't have any of these older model lenses still around. Even if the 24-80L/80-200L is not up to the standards of the current L series, they surely are a step above what I'm currently shooting with, right? Are there any problems with these lenses I should know about, or particular nits to look out for when purchasing? What about the quality difference at 200mm between the prime and the zoom? Thanks in advance for everyone's input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isaac sibson Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 The 80-200 F2.8L has a superb reputation for its optics. Completely on a par with both of the 70-200s, and some say better. AF is fast and reasonably quiet also, despite being AFD. The only things you lose out on are FTM and Teleconverter compatibility. Unfortunately, the news is not so good on the 28-80. This lens suffers high levels of vignetting and distortion, and must be stopped down to minimise the vignetting. Sharpness and colour rendition are excellent (some say better than the 28-70 F2.8L), but many users were unhappy with it due to the other issues. With the 24-70 out now, probably a better bet to find a 28-70 going for reasonable money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_monas1 Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 I saw a couple of 80-200/2.8 on keh.com for $725.00. For even cheaper, you can get a new 70-200/4. That lens is incredible, and is half the cost (and half the weight) of the 70-200/2.8. You lose 1 stop, and it is white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eos 10 fan Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Be aware that the 80-200L does not accept Canon's TCs. -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edlark Posted March 7, 2003 Author Share Posted March 7, 2003 Dan, That's a useful bit of information. I don't generally need anything longer than 200mm, but it would be nice to have the option. I know that the newer version of the Canon 200mm 2.8 prime accepts teleconverters, is this true for the original version with the built-in hood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isaac sibson Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Yes, the original 200 F2.8L is TC compatible. The only change was the lens hood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eos 10 fan Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Canon & Sigma TCs have a protruding front element which may/will hit the rear element of some lenses (such as the 80-200L). The Kenko Pro and Tamron SP TCs (some say they are identical) are usually recommended as alternatives. I remember seeing a test of the Kenko Pro TCs Vs. Canon's TCs - the performance at the image centre was very close with the Canon TCs showing their pedigree at the edges. -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_simpson Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 Just a note on teleconverter compatibility - I had an 80-200 on approval a couple of years back which did accept the 1.4x - checked this out and found that an edition of the the lens was manufactured with (I think it was) 82mm front element to help with vignetting ( or so they said)- I presume the rear end was engineered to match. No idea how many of these are out there. I compared it with the latest Sigma head to head - not much to choose except the sigma gave higher light readings - neither really focussed fast enough for sport although I managed with an older Sigma for a while before going off white with Canon. If super fast focussing is not essential the 80-200 is excellent - and for journalism a third party doubler is adequate and affordable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_. Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 With the 70-200IS lens being here, used non-IS 70-200/2.8's are in the near price ballpark with the 80-200. Then there is the excellent Sigma 70-200/2.8 HSM at less than either Canon lens. I've used it and it is right on par with the Canons. In the shorter range, a couple cheap really fast primes (35/2, 50/1.8, or even 85/1.8 depending on your style) to augment the 28-135IS might be a better solution than an f/2.8 zoom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliff_henry Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 E S, IMHO the 28-80L and 80-200L are "up to the standards of the current L series". It is unfortunate that some lenses get an undeserved reputation that follow them forever. I feel this is the case with the 28-80L. If you want more details on this lens, see my other post at: www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003gp9 www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003oem www.pnoto.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0047eK www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004Jyz Or you can do a search to see many other post on the subject. These lenses will give you L quality glass on a budget. Cliff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_bunnik Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 the 28-80 is an incredible lens. Very very sharp. I shot a wedding with it 2 weeks ago and the portraits at 80mm with f/4 were almost too sharp. Nwver had problems with vignetting. This lens is amazing. The complaints about this lens almost always come from people who never used this lens but who just repeat something they once heard. Buy this lens and you will not regret it. It is big and heavy though. Frank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth_harper Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 Get a couple of Tokina's. The 28-80f2.8 and the 80-200f2.8. Both available secondhand for a song. I've got the 28-80 and it's a fine lens, I hear the 80-200 is also a cracker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben_rubinstein___mancheste Posted March 9, 2003 Share Posted March 9, 2003 keep in mind that the 28-80 is a variable apeture, 2.8-4 this may bother you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now