I have been shooting for a couple of years now. My current kit includes a 30D, Tokina 12-24, Canon 24-105L, Canon 50 1.8, and Canon 100-400L. We are leaving next month on a trip to Europe, and I am planning on taking the body and the first three lenses, leaving the 100-400 at home due to size and weight.
I have considered getting the 70-300 DO zoom as a travel lens. We do like to travel, and it would be handy to have a light weight tele-zoom. On the other hand, it would cover essentially the same range as the big 100-400. For travel where weight doesn't matter (car trips) or where photography is a key part of the trip (if we ever go back to Africa), the 100-400 is coming along.
For about the same price, I could get the 90 tilt-sift lens. I have been thinking about getting this lens for awhile. Unlike the 70-300, it would allow taking images that I could not get with my current gear. I like both macro and landscapes, and it would help expand the work I do in those fields. I also like thing mechanical, this is part of my attraction to photography in the first place, and I think I would enjoy working to learn the tilt-shift technique. Getting the 90 TS-E leaves the long end uncovered for the trip, however.
I know it gets down to a matter of priorities, what kind of shooting I plan to do, and this is an apples-and-oranges question. That said, I would appreciate help from those with more experience than I, especially with the two lenses in question.
Thanks in advance for your input
I lived in Germany for four years in the '80's in the Air Force. Were I back visiting I'd take the 20D and all the non-L glass I own. It's light weight, covers 10-300mm and has good IQ. If you had a FF or a 1 series I'd go with my 3 L zooms.
In trying to decide on my dad's birthday present, I shot with both the 70-300 DO and non-DO IS. The DO has its advantages, but it's heavier than the non-DO and not really optically superior. For a grand or more, it seemed overpriced and pointless. (He ended up getting lightly used copies of the 17-85 and 70-300 IS and couldn't be happier)
The 90 TSE is a great lens. I'm not sure it would be my choice for a trip, but that, as you noted, is up to your shooting style.
Have you considered getting a 135L or a 200f/2.8L II and a set of tele-extenders? I ask because it allows you to cover a broader range and gives you low-light shooting options while still being pack friendly. Either of them would also work well with your extension tubes (the 135L is an unsung macro star once you break down the MFD barrier). Just a thought.
