Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 2, 2003, 9:13 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 274
Default Additional lens for EOS-10D ??

I am thinking about purchasing the Canon EOS-10D with the Canon EF 17-40mm F4.0L USM lens to start. This lens will be used mostly indoors (with 420EX) to take family member pics at parties (with occasional low-light). I am also looking at a second telephoto lens that will be used mostly outdoors (landscapes, children playing, etc...). Which of the following would you recommend for someone on a strict budget:

Canon EF 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon EF 28-200mm f3.5-5.6 USM
Canon EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM

THANKS!
agiaccio is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 2, 2003, 11:26 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

The 17-40L is an excellent lens, you will like it a lot. As for the more telephoto side, go for the 28-135 IS. It's a very nice lens, plus it has IS. It is about the best one you can get in that focal range. You could also consider getting a 70-200L besides that. I would stay away from the 75-300. It is not in the same quality range as the 17-40 or 28-135 or 70-200.

Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2003, 1:11 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

From the lens review site I go to:

I agree with barthold. The 75-300 is not good.

I'd like to disagree that the 28-135 "about the best one you can get in that focal range"... but I can't. Not because this lens is anything really special (it isn't. Its only average optically) but there really isn't anything else with that zoom range. Tamon has a 28-105 f2.8 which is close (and better f-stop) but it is short 30mm!

The 28-200 isn't well though of either (what little I could find about it.)

How far away do you think your subjects will be for this other lens? Do you really need out to 200mm? Sigma makes a good 70-200 (or is it 80-200?) which is well though of, but its a bit expensive (much cheaper than Canon's lens, but still not cheap.)

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2003, 1:25 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

Yes, I am with Eric. The 28-135 is a good, but not great, lens. I don't understand why Canon doesn't make a 'L' lens in that range! I'm not sure what the 70-200 EX Sigma costs, but the 70-200 F4 Canon is around $600. The Sigma is a F2.8 lens though. The Canon 70-200 F2.8 is $1200 without IS and about $1700 with IS. Personally I'm addicted to IS now :-)


Eric, isn't that Tamron 28-105 F2.8 quite heavy, and expensive? I recall looking at it for a while, but decided on the 28-135 anyway.

Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2003, 4:24 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 294
Default

I have the Sigma EX 70-200mm and I really like that over my 75-300 IS USM from canon. I was able to grab my 70-200 from ebay new for around $600 bucks. So far. I see it perform better then the other lenses I currently have. Plus its nice to have that big fstop.
UniSonBBS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2003, 4:30 PM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,543
Default

Yeap, the Tamron 28-105 f/2.8 is THE best in this range. Some of my friends use it for portrait as well, but it does not come cheap! It's heavy just like most wide aperture lenses are because they have a lot of glass and a big front element... It's front filter is 82mm! ... Check your 70-200 f/2.8 it's no where close to the diameter of this baby. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I second the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX APO HSM as well... Actually you can pick up both the excellent Sigma and Tamron for the price of one IS 'L', but then that just an opinion. Beside with f/2.8 you might not need IS on the 28-105, but gain a little extra defocus in DOF!

BTW I have the Canon EF 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM also, it's OK, but if I had to do it all over, I would not buy it! I rather get the 17-40 f/4 L or the new Sigma 20-40 f/2.8 EX and live with the gap in-between the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8... 8)
NHL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2003, 8:18 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default

Choice of lense does also depend on situation you are going to use. This information you sort of hinted.
I have the 28-136 IS at my dispossal, and I found it to be much better than an entry level Canon zoom lens. Ofcourse there are better lenses, but...weight is a point and secondly, were do you expect to swap lenses most? I like to capture street life and city scapes. Changing lenses in the middle of a sidewalk in centre of town, might be asking for bad luck...So in the city the 28-135 IS, is a good allround lens, other option would be a prime lens (fixed focallength).
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2003, 11:07 PM   #8
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,543
Default

... See 28-135 is the problem: 28-135mm was a perfect lens for film but with the 1.6x factor it is like a normal lens with the 10D/300D, ie 28x1.6 is too long for landscape and not wide enough for that wide angle perspective. 135mm is already cover by the other 70-200mm with a much better f/2.8 aperture, plus it's too long for close quarter (ie 216mm equivalent!). In actual use I keep having to switch my 28-135 IS to a wider lens...

A 17-40 is more like it for street life and cityscape in this case (ie 28~70mm equivalent). The other lens is mainly for the long... 8)
NHL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2003, 5:00 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default

Thanks for the tip NHL. Something equivallent to film 50mm (50/1.6=31mm) is very nice. With Exif Viewer (http://home.pacbell.net/michal_k/) it is easy to see which focallength is most used, in my case 45mm upto 135mm.
Example of photo taken at 47mm
http://www.desk.nl/mupe/photos/alber...W_0033_RT8.jpg
A big camera makes people shy; if I had used my feet instead of zoom, the photo would have ended up lifeless...

Back to Agiaccio's topic, I think taking shots of children playing (unless he means his family members), will require a lense with a bit of focallangth (200mm might be too much for social scenes)
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2003, 9:20 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 227
Default

I'd also like to suggest Sigma's 28-105 2.8-4 lens. Fairly bright at the wide end and not too bad at an equivalent to 170mm zoom too.

While I'd like to have a 70-200 f2.8 lens the cost is a big issue as is the size of the lens. That's a lot of glass at the front of the camera you'll have to carry around with you.

Personally I don't shoot many pictures at the wide end of things so NHL's comment on the lack of landscape ability isn't a big deal for me.

While the optics on the 75-300 lenses aren't the best they are pretty inexpensive. I think that you can get a Sigma non-APO for $149 at b&h.

One thing about the lens tests you should remember is that the smaller than 35mm image chip means that shots taken don't use the whole of the lens. Complaints about problems at the edge of pictures aren't going to affect a dSLR as much.

What I have on by digi rebel is:

Sigma 28-105 - stays on almost all the time
Canon 75-300 non USM - lot's of zoom for wildlife (~480mm)
Canon 18-55 EF-S lens - sits in the big bag down in the basement

next up for me:

50mm macro
200-400 zoom
ultra wide angle that will work on both my film and digital SLR

BTW - I bought the non-USM 75-300 because the USM lens isn't a true ring motor, the USM version is a bit quieter and bit faster but I put the difference in price towards accessories that I'll get more benefit from.
ursa is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:14 PM.