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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 30, 2009, 12:39 PM   #21
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelT1i View Post
I'm currently in the market for what I have seen on-line refered to as a "vacation lens", i.e. a 18-200mm zoom to replace the 18-55mm kit lens on my Canon T1i.
Any advice in choosing one over the other? Are there other 18-xxxmm lenses that I should be considering?
Thx.
As someone who's in a similar situation - new owner of a T1i - I suggest you try before you buy: http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/tamr...3-vc/for-canon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelT1i View Post
Are there other 18-xxxmm lenses that I should be considering?
Canon 28-300 IS L

Last edited by gschaps; Oct 30, 2009 at 2:12 PM.
gschaps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2009, 7:18 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wrasku View Post
Well, I agree that it is not a technical test as the post above linked to, however, as far as being wrong, I can't find anything wrong with this lens, especially since I can't afford L glass, and I was looking for a lens that would stay on my camera in most situations. If you look at the user reviews on B&H Photo, they seem to concur with my opinion. I do read the reviews before purchasing, which is why I mentioned that I was planning on sending this lens back after trying it out, but I'm telling you, this is a very good all purpose lens.
You have to be a little careful about the reviews on B&H, because they are all reader reviews. There are often no real performance criteria stated. For a lens like an 18-200 etc, the comments are often about great for taking on trips, not having to change lenses, etc.
For example, one Professional give a score of 5 stars, but says:
"I was a sceptic when I first saw this lens at a recent show. Now, I am a believer. This lens is perfect for weddings. I found myself never really needing to change my lens especially at the reception. You need to be a little careful when using the widest setting when shooting large groups."

You need to read between the lines. His primary use is for people in the center, but the last comment is the giveaway. He's saying that the edges are too soft to get good resolution on people towards the edge of a group shot.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hards80 View Post
i was not saying the lens was not a good lens for your needs or as a general walkaround lens.

i was referring to your conclusions specifically to the comparison 70-200 f4. i am simply stating that no one considering to purchase a consumer grade superzoom (18-2xx of any kind) should expect anything near the image quality from a dedicated telephoto lens (especially an L series). there are a lot of ppl that read these posts, and its important they have correct information for which to base their hard earned spending on. its important for them to know these lenses are not even in the same league. and should not even be compared really, apples to oranges ya know.

every lens is a compromise. superzooms compromise image quality for convenience. simple as that. if you need the convenience, then its a good compromise. if you do not, then its not. find the right tool for your needs.
I'd agree with all of that!!!! You need to judge superzooms not in absolute terms, but how good they are for what they are!!! A good superzoom will in most cases, only perform like very average regular lens (18-55mm, 55-200mm low end kit lens) or worse.

Last edited by dnas; Oct 30, 2009 at 7:22 PM.
dnas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2009, 7:22 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gschaps View Post
As someone who's in a similar situation - new owner of a T1i - I suggest you try before you buy: http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/tamr...3-vc/for-canon.



Canon 28-300 IS L
That lens is actually a very good lens, even "For what it is"!!!!!!!
Probably the ONE exception to the rule!! (one an APS-C camera)

I suppose this is not surprising, given the $2500 price tag!!!

However, the 28mm at the bottom gives you an equivalent field of view of a 42mm lens on an APS-C camera, so you would need to take that into account.

Last edited by dnas; Oct 30, 2009 at 7:29 PM.
dnas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2009, 8:25 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dnas View Post
A good superzoom will in most cases, only perform like very average regular lens (18-55mm, 55-200mm low end kit lens) or worse.
... usually worse.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2009, 9:01 PM   #25
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

to be honest, kit lens' get a bad rap. usually because they are used by people with limited knowledge of shooting dslrs. so they go and blame it on their cheap lens. or whatever.

the new kit lenses are actually pretty good optically. build quality is usually subpar at best. but the optics are generally pretty good. mainly due to the slow maximal aperture and reduced image circle of aps-c cameras, it doesnt take expensive optics to make a short zoom that performs pretty well.

the new kit lens from canon (with IS) is good enough that i bought one for travel. that is i bought it separately as it didnt come with my camera. and i have taken some really nice pictures with that lens, that are darn sharp. and for traveling it has the bonus of being lightweight and expendable.... :P
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2009, 10:09 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Good information, Dustin-

However, we have to also allow for the subjective element in this discussion as well. Ignore the IQ elements, other reports about superzoom lenses (eg: the Tamron 18-250/18-270mm lenses).

If people are pleased with the lens, and it realistically meets their image quality requirements for their vacation photos, then I think that we do not have to harp on the issue of image quality at all.

We just pat them on the back and urge them to "press on!" the bottom line, in my opinion, is this: as long as folks are happy with the result, who are we to urge them on to a different course.

As I continue with my own investigation of the Pentax Kx camera, I am actually using the Pentax 18-250mm lens, ( a re-badged Tamron 18-250mm lens) which is producing wonderful images. Those images, are hard to argue with, when critically evalutaed. So, with my hands on experience, I can relate to the convenience of an excellent single lens solution.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2009, 10:18 PM   #27
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

i was not trying to knock superzooms per se. and i did say that if you want convenience, travel, they are great. heck, i have considered buying the 18-270 a few times myself. but, i realized that when i travel, i rarely shoot telephoto, so it was not the right tool for me.

i was just trying to point out that there is a right tool for every job. and with that, there is compromise. the superzooms perform well, they are down right amazing for covering 18-270mms of focal length. but with this convenience, you naturally expect them to the jobs of specialized lenses less well. and that is perfectly fine. they should not be expected to.

like i said, i just want to help people find the right tool. if they need the convenience of 1 lens, then by all means that is the right tool. but if they want to do mainly wide-angle stuff, then there is a better tool. or if they want a telephoto, then get a telephoto. etc.
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2009, 11:39 AM   #28
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 20
Default Canon 28-300 F3.5-5.6L USM IS

Quote:
Originally Posted by dnas View Post
That lens is actually a very good lens, even "For what it is"!!!!!!!
Probably the ONE exception to the rule!! (one an APS-C camera)
I suppose this is not surprising, given the $2500 price tag!!!
There's a used one for sale in my area. The owner's description says, among other things, "This lens isn't for everyone - it is rather heavy."
gschaps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2009, 12:28 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gschaps View Post
There's a used one for sale in my area. The owner's description says, among other things, "This lens isn't for everyone - it is rather heavy."
Yes. 3 lb., 11 oz. is rather heavy.

If a lens has a tripod mount, it will be "rather heavy."
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2009, 1:32 PM   #30
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 20
Default Canon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
Yes. 3 lb., 11 oz. is rather heavy.
If a lens has a tripod mount, it will be "rather heavy."
On the other hand, lensrentals.com says, about this lens:

"Note: We have found that few people are using the tripod ring with this lens and they generally take it off the first day of rental. Because of this, we do NOT ship the tripod ring with the lens unless you request it in the special instructions box when you order."

So, maybe it is a "vacation lens" after all.
gschaps 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 3:43 PM.