Hi Everyone,

I've been advised to repost this here:

I've been reading the lens reviews for a while, and figured it time to join up and ask a couple of questions.

Firstly, I'm after a 'walk around' lens that i can stick on the camera when I'm out for a cycle/walk what have you and not wanting to take everything with me. I'm seeing good reviews for the Canon 28-135mm IS USM which looks good (i'll try it this weekend).

The problem comes when you factor in my second question, which is that i have lots of very soft shots with the 75-300 USM III over about 250mm (shown on the lens). I know that part of this could be my eyes, but even when autofocusing i don't think it improves that much.

Since i can't really afford a 70-200mm L F4, this leads me to look at the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS which scores even better than the 28-135 on here.

I was just wondering if a) I should just keep going with the current zoom lens as the 55-250 wouldn't be that much better (get the 28-135 for walk around duties, and save for an L if i cant work round the problem) and b) if i i'd decide to change, i'm guessing the closeness of the two zoom ranges would make buying both the 55-250 and 28-135 a waste of money?

I hope that makes some sense!

Many thanks.
Ed

Hello Ed,

I would focus on something like a Tamron 17-50/2.8. It's a great lens for the money and one you can use for a long time.

If you are looking for a one lens solution with longer reach, Canon's 18-200IS can be a bit pricey, but many like its convenience. There is also Tarmon's 18-270 VC and Sigma 18-125 OS or 18-200 OS. Of course you'll sacrifice a little quality for convenience.

If you have a bit more to spend, Canon 24-105IS is a definite smart investment and great range (far better than the older 28-135IS.

I suspect your problems with the 75-300 come from a combination of the fact that the lens is reported to be ( I don't own one) soft at the long end, and the slow shutter speeds resulting from the small aperture at the long end. It is, I'm afraid, a cheap lens that has flaws and weaknesses. You are dealing with them.

My advice is that there is only one solution to poor quality lenses, and that is good quality lenses. Unfortunately, good lenses are expensive. There are some not-so-expensive lenses that apparently work well, but you need to pay attention to identify them. The Canon 55-250 seems to have a good reputation (I don't own one either) and is not too costly.

One way to get quite good lenses for cheaper prices is to cherry pick from the third party manufacturers. You do not have to use Canon lenses, and can be much better off using good third party glass rather than cheap Canon lenses. Example: the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 is a very good lens for a very good price. There are others from Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina that are not "quite" as good as the top Canon lenses, but will offer speed and image quality that is very good without the extravagant prices of Canon L's. Perhaps one of the very best buys in Canon L lens quality is the 70-200 F4 that you mention. Test it well and you would see immediately what you gain by spending that money.

thanks very much for you're replies, I'm not after a 17-50 or similar at the moment as i'm actually very happy with the 18-55 IS that came with my camera (unless you think it would be better investment than the 50mm prime i see people recommending)

I'll have a look at other brands (which i hadn't ruled out) but i'd heard somewhere that canons work best with canon lenses, although i don't know if thats true or not.

I'm going to have a shot of the L lens and a few others tomorrow i hope, so will know what to aim for.

Also do you think something along the 28-75 would give enough range as a walk about? I'm not after absolute quality in that scenario, but anythings better than no camera!

I wrestled with a similar question for a long time. There just has to be that "one true lens" the only one we need. I couldn't find it, and like l.g.c. states: the solution to poor quality lenses is good quality lenses.

I finally realized that when I went light, I might miss some shots, but I would probably have more fun. Take a critical look at your photos and see what focal length you favor--what length on your zoom did you use most often on your keepers? Find a good quality lens somewhere near that focal length and carry just it. You might be surprised at how much fun it is and how the quality of your photos improves. It certainly did for me.

Without question, you will lose your ability to take some shots. But the shots you do take will be better.

Having said all that, a sometimes maligned lens that I think is very good is the Canon 70-300 DO. It is near L quality in build, and fun to use. With a bit of PP sharpening it takes very good pictures. I have one, and although I like it a lot, I don't use it nearly as much as I once did. I'm happier now that I have convinced myself that I don't have to cover all focal lengths every time I go out.

Good luck.

Lorin

Ed, I don't know you or your photography, but picking a lens is very personal. Only you can decide what you need for your photography.

The 18-55 kit lens is bundled with the camera because most people find that to be about the ideal "walk around" focal length range. If you like that lens, I think you should put it on the camera and walk about" with it. Take lots of pictures for a few weeks, and then examine them carefully.

If you find most of them were shot at the 85mm end of the lens, maybe you need a longer lens for your next one. If they are all at the 18mm end, maybe an ultra-wide should be next. If you find the lens is wide open and your shutter speeds are too low for hand holding all the time, maybe a faster lens is in order. That style of thinking.

You do not need to "cover all the focal lengths"; you need to have those focal lengths that fit your photographic style. You need to find out what that style is before you spend any more money. Then you need to get a good lens that does what you need. You are far better off to spend more than you want to on a lens you will actually use, than to get a cheap lens that doesn't quite work for you.

There is no reason you must use Canon lenses; anyone who says so is misleading you.

Hi l.g.c. you make a very good point.

I don't need to cover all the ranges all the time, so I'll just wait a while and see which lens gets used most.

At the moment i'm seem to switch equally between the 18-55 and the 70-300.

My interests are really landscapes and wild life so it's really each end of the spectrum.

Thanks again for your help.
Ed

Ed my walk around set is the 28-105 3.5-4.5 USM (mk1) + a 70-300 IS. The 28-105 can be had nice and cheap and is a cracking little lens. the mk2 is supposed to have a bit better bokeh due to better apature blades but other than that they are the same. It also has a little bro in the 24-85.
If you want long range and cant afford the L the 70-300 IS is a great lens for the money (best 70-300 around).
You could also think about the twin lens kit that you can get 18-55 IS & 55-250 IS which makes a good light weight combo.

Sorry I see you have the 18-55 IS already. Think about the 55-250 though

If you are happy with the 18-55 IS kit lens, the 55-250 IS will be the perfect mate for telephoto. These make a nice lightweight pair and optical quality is very good.

+1 I completely agree with this.

The point isn't coming home with a thousand photos, but a few that I am really proud of... but that's me.

Anyone that comes home with thousands of photos that they are really proud of isn't critical enough IMO...

LDR99 wrote:
I wrestled with a similar question for a long time. There just has to be that "one true lens" the only one we need. I couldn't find it, and like l.g.c. states: the solution to poor quality lenses is good quality lenses.

I finally realized that when I went light, I might miss some shots, but I would probably have more fun. Take a critical look at your photos and see what focal length you favor--what length on your zoom did you use most often on your keepers? Find a good quality lens somewhere near that focal length and carry just it. You might be surprised at how much fun it is and how the quality of your photos improves. It certainly did for me.

Without question, you will lose your ability to take some shots. But the shots you do take will be better.

Having said all that, a sometimes maligned lens that I think is very good is the Canon 70-300 DO. It is near L quality in build, and fun to use. With a bit of PP sharpening it takes very good pictures. I have one, and although I like it a lot, I don't use it nearly as much as I once did. I'm happier now that I have convinced myself that I don't have to cover all focal lengths every time I go out.

Good luck.

Lorin