Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Next lens

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    E.Sussex,UK
    Posts
    279

    Canon 18-200

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
    Looking at the used 70-200mm for sale on ebay I notice a trend in reasons for sale - "Rarly used", "Used once and put in a cupboard", "Used for no more that 100 photos" etc.

    I am now thinking about a 18-200 of some make Canon, Tamron or Sigma. Any comments on these three?

    Another problem with the 70-200 is it will not fit in my camera bag when attached to the camera!
    I did use a Canon 18-200 for several months with my 500d.I found it surprisingly sharp,better than I expected but it suffered from quite bad distortion,most of which was capable of remedy with software. The comments made above about reach are spot on-at a true telephoto of 320m max it was not quite long enough for the odd sporting event I follow (cricket mainly) and because as a " do it all" lens I found I was rarely using the telephoto end anyway,I switched to the Sigma 17-70 OS which has been fine for my purposes.

    You can pick up the non stabilised Canon 70-200 f4 surprisingly cheaply nowadays, under 500 and that's supposed to be a very sharp quality lens.As noted the question is how often you would use it.

    The Canon 15-85 is said to be very sharp,but its not cheap,though its within your budget by the look of it.The 18-135 gets mixed reviews but it is a much cheaper lens.

    Canon 60D,
    Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.0 DC Macro OS HSM,
    Canon 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS,
    Canon Speedlite 270EX

    Panasonic Lumix DMC GF3,
    Panasonic Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm/F3.5-5.6

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
    Another problem with the 70-200 is it will not fit in my camera bag when attached to the camera!
    Typically a lens will have more impact on your image quality than even a body will. Get the lens that best helps you achieve your goals in photography and figure out how to carry it around later.
    The respect of those you respect is greater than the applause of the multitude.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Posts
    686
    A guy at work brought in his Canon 24-70mm F2.8 this afternoon. Very good quality ( there are signs of some purple fringing in shiny areas ) but I would not call it a walk about lens as it weighs a ton - 950g to be exact

    The range looked good and it is supprising the difference from 55 to 70mm.

    Thanks for your comments on the 18-200mm JPW2020 and I think I have decided against both that and the 70-200mm now.

    At this rate I might decide on a lens to buy before my summer hols

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Posts
    686
    Right 90% sure of the EF 24-105mm now.

    Pros:
    1/ I have a EF-S 10-22mm already and I might as well keep it; if I went for the EF-S 15-85mm I would sell the 10-22mm.

    2/ They have the same size thread so I only need one size of filter.

    3/ I have a bit more reach.

    4/ Cover from 10 -105mm in total.

    Cons:
    1/ I will have two lenses to carry.

    2/ Cost of the EF 24-105mm over the EF-S 15-85mm ( I would also get some money back selling the 10-22mm ).

    3/ 100+g heaver than the EF-S 15-85mm.

    Any fault in my logic?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    4,428
    The problem with 10-22 and 24-105 combination is that if you need to shoot indoors you will have to change lenses. You need to go wide at 15 (24 mm) you have to pop the 10-22, and then when you zoom out a little, straight away you need the 24-105. So much inconvenience, in my opinion.
    I find it most convenience to have one lens to cover indoors, as such two lenses combo (10-22 & 24-105) would be too clumsy for important job such as a wedding; or even less important shots of a birthday party. I'd rather have 18-55 for such job - no lens change; you won't have time for that!

    If you are not happy with the 18-55, sell it and buy the 15-85 which is a great lens. Then you have a great walkabout lens and indoors lens (albeit with a flash).

    Ultra wide 10-22 is not recommended for general photography except for landscape and architectural photography. I'd keep it but not as complement to cover the shorter focal length need.
    Nikon D90, D80
    Nikkor 16-85mm AF-S DX F/3.5-5.6G ED VR, Tamron SP AF 28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) macro, Nikkor 50mm F/1.4D, Nikkor 50mm F/1.8D, Nikkor AF-S VR 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6G IF-ED, Sigma 105mm F/2.8 EX DG Macro ||| 2x SB800 | SB600 ||| Manfrotto 190XB

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    E.Sussex,UK
    Posts
    279
    On a practical note I would also just wonder if you might find the lens a little front heavy on the 500d and it might feel unbalanced-the lens weighs nearly twice as much as the body.Did you try it on your 500d when your friend bought the lens in for you to see?

    Canon 60D,
    Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.0 DC Macro OS HSM,
    Canon 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS,
    Canon Speedlite 270EX

    Panasonic Lumix DMC GF3,
    Panasonic Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm/F3.5-5.6

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    756
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
    So I have the 10-22 and if I had the 24-105 there is a gap of 2mm in the range. I know that I will need to change lenses and carry one lens.
    Don't be obsessed with covering every possible focal length. That gap is really, really unimportant. Here's an article well worth reading as you're thinking about this: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...n-part-ii.html
    Looking to buy a Pentax flash? Check out my Definitive Guide to Pentax P-TTL Flash Options.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Posts
    686
    Yes I tried the 24-70mm F2.8 on my camera and it was way to heavy at 950g. There is no way I could carry that around all day. The EF 24-105mm is 670g which is still quite heavy and the 15-85mm is 575g; not that much difference between the two.

    I am not worried about a few mm gap between lens sizes as you should be able to work around that.

    I did some portrate work tonight and with the 18-55 kit lens I was nearly sitting in the models lap ( not that I do much portrate work ) but it was a bit of an uncomfortable feeling.

    So I need more reach, would 85mm be much better than 55mm?

    The only way I am going to find out is to buy one or the other and if it does not work then sell it. I just do not know anyone one with either of the two lenses I am now considering.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    756
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
    The only way I am going to find out is to buy one or the other and if it does not work then sell it. I just do not know anyone one with either of the two lenses I am now considering.
    You can also buy from somewhere with a liberal return policy. If you buy from B&H, for example, you'll get two weeks to change your mind (provided you treat it with kid gloves).
    Looking to buy a Pentax flash? Check out my Definitive Guide to Pentax P-TTL Flash Options.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Posts
    686
    By accident I found a new guy at work who has the EF 24-105mm ( he even had it with him today which is a bit of a coincidence! ) and it feels OK on the camera.

    I can get a full height body shot in from about 2m and he uses the lens for everyday photography.
    Last edited by Anthony; 03-09-2011 at 09:20 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •