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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 18, 2006, 10:00 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
chuck biddinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 504
Default

I have a Canon D20 with Image Stabilization 17-85. Yesterday I ordered a 22 to 200 lens but it does NOT have Image Stabilization. I did not think about Image Stabilization until after I ordered the lens. Does Canon make a 22 to 200 with Image Stabilization?

Thanks for any input.

Chuck


chuck biddinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 18, 2006, 12:40 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
wsandman1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 318
Default

Chuck,

No canon doesn't make a 22 - 200 IS lens.I think lens you just brought is also of lower quality than your 17 - 85 lens. To get the coverage you want and similar qualityas your current lens, you'll have to get the canon 70 - 200 2.8 IS ($1800.00). My suggestion based on the fact you brougt the 22 - 200 (?) is to take a look at the sigma 70 200 2.8 (no stabilization) or canon 70 - 200 F4 (no IS). Others on this board will have suggestions. You can browse the various threads for comparisons of lenses in the 70 - 200mm range to get a better idea of what lens you might want to buy. I hope this helps.

Bill


wsandman1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 19, 2006, 8:09 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
chuck biddinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 504
Default

Hi Bill,

Why do you feel it is not the qualty of my 17-85 lens? Is it because it does not have Image Stabilization, or is there another reason.

Thanks for your input.

Chuck


chuck biddinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 19, 2006, 8:24 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
wsandman1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 318
Default

Chuck,

The 17 - 85 lenshas the reputation for being very sharp and of near L lens image quality. It is alsoa bitexpensive, at least $500. It is in another class when compared to the 55 - 200 zoom.

If it's the lens I think it is, it's the 55 - 200 mm zoom,part of the entry levelkit system for the Digital Rebel camreas. This includes the 18 55 mm wide angle. The specs and real life comments regarding this lens is that it is soft andd does not have the sharpness and contrast of the 70 - 200 or even the 70 - 300 IS model. I think you may be better off getting the 70 - 300 if you need IS. The quality and performance will be closer to the 17 - 85 you already have.

Bill
wsandman1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 19, 2006, 9:10 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
chuck biddinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 504
Default

Thanks for your input, one more question.

What about the 24/105 with IS.

Thanks again.



Chuck
chuck biddinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 19, 2006, 10:25 AM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9
Default

Bill (wsandman1) makes an interesting comment about the 17-85, that it is sharp and near "L". I have read many reviews that it is soft and inconsistent. I have the 17-85 and have gotten many sharp pictures and many not so sharp pictures. The lens is inconsistent. So, for any particular subject, I take more pictures, hoping for that "sharp one." I also shoot in raw so I can make make post processing changes in RawShooter. For a general walk around lens, I really like the 17-85. I also have the 70-200 2.8L IS (and 1.4x converter) and love this lens. It focuses very quickly (I call it point and shoot, because that's what I can do, and very quickly) and the images are very sharp. The lens is built very well,but is very heavy. I have read that the non IS version of this lens is a little sharper. But for me, I want to IS -- and I am very happy with the sharpness of the lens.

Regarding the 27-105 4L, I recently bought this lens and sent it to the factory for calibration, because it was not as sharp as my 17-85. (Back to Bill's comment about sharpness of the 17-85.) It is still not as sharp, but it is very consistent. It is up in the air for me which lens I will use as a walk around lens. It really depends on what I think I will be shooting that day.

I think the decision between the 24-105 and the 70-200 (or some similar focal length lens) depends on your intended use of the lens. For a general wank around lens I think the 17-85 is good, it has the wider angle capability than the 24-105. However, the 24-105 goes out further. So,... what will you be shooting? I like the longer focal length of the 70-200 for portraits, macro shooting (it has excellent bokeh), and sports. I also have the Canon 70-300 IS, which is an excellent lens, and much cheaper and lighterthan the 70-200, but not as fast. In fact, it is difficult for me to tell the difference in image quality between the two lenses. For travel, I use the 70-300, as it is smaller and lighter than the 70-200. For shooting close to home I use the 70-200 2.8 because it is very fast and has nice bokeh, and it is really fun to use.

Good luck in your decision.


Sawyer Duvall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2006, 10:31 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
chuck biddinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 504
Default

Thanks for the above info! One more question.

Canon has two 70-300 lens, there is a $500. price difference. I think Ilike the more expensive lens because it is much smaller and a phone call to Canon claims it is a much better lens.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...p;modelid=9996

Just looking for more comments, before I spend $1K.


chuck biddinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2006, 7:11 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
wsandman1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 318
Default

Chuck,

I think there are some reviews and posters that say the quality of the new 70 - 300 IS rivals the70 - 300 DO (diffractive optics)model's image quality. There was an issue with the original 70 - 300 IS when shooting inportrait mode. I think that issue has been resolved. There isan additional premium for the conveniencehaving a smaller size with the more expensive 70 - 300 DO model.

Bill
wsandman1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2006, 10:18 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Justin Hancock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 272
Default

Several points need to be made.
  1. Canon is currently working on the problem with the EF 70-300mm IS USM (non-DO) when held in portrait mode, see here: http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...;modelid=11922[/*]
  2. All the reviews I've read have said the non-DO version produces a better image than the DO-lense. I haven't read one review or article that mentions otherwise. And trust me, I've been researching the non-DO version for quite a while. Once the service notice is resolved, I'll be purchasing the non-DO version.[/*]
Many have said the non-DO version rivals that of some L-quality lenses.
Justin Hancock 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 10:07 AM.