... did you use it and then sell it or do you still keep it in your bag? Are you using it with a crop sensor or a FF?
I remember reading not too long ago on this board that there are a few members that have gone on long trips with this lens mated to their body the entire time. Some have even simplified life by having this as their main go-to lens. Unfortunately I can't seem to find those posts anymore. It sounds like an amazing travel lens, especially if you are going to be going somewhere that you don't want to be swapping lenses all the time (due to dust, sand, wind, or other factors)
I was thinking of renting this lens for a trip to yosemite later on this year and just wanted to get some opinions before doing so. Originally thought of purchasing one used to try out but I don't see many for sale on the buy/sell forum. This could be either a) it's not a popular lens or b) people that purchase it end up keeping it for the long run. From what I've read online, there is some distortion at 28mm but I'm curious if this is easily fixed in post using lens correction in lightroom or photoshop. Also how the sharpness of the lens is if you are only planning on prints of 8x12 or 12x16?
I'd be using it with a 5d or a 1dsm2.
Your comments (or criticism) is greatly appreciated.
I bought this lens about a year ago, and it has practically speaking not been of my 1DsII.
One exception though, when I went to the Swiss mountains in february, it was mounted to my 5DII...)
The reasons I bought it was to save weight and space, and not having to change lenses in bad weather.
How saving weight? Well, compared to carrying a 24-105 and a 70-200 f2.8 which was my solution before, this one lens i lighter, and obviously I don't have to change between them two with cold fingers in freezing conditions and snow-storms...
I am very happy with it, and it is absolutely living up to _my_ expectations. YMMW I guess...
I don't mind the push-pull feature either (I also have the 100-400), and I find the optical quality most adequate for my uses. I haven't printed bigger than 13x19" though.
Oh..! and the IS is very good on this lens in my opinion.
Hello,
I used one a trip to the Destin area of Florida, because the white sugary like sand can get everywhere and I did not want to do a bunch of lens changes. I mated it to a MKIV, and I believe it was the perfect setup for that trip. I was very happy with my outcomes and have printed a few 16x20 and they look super. Of course the whole time the lens is on the camera I am thinking this is a compromise, but in the end when you look at the prints compromise never comes to mind. The lens is pretty darn solid!!
Greg
I have had this lens for over a year. It is attached to a 1DIII. I use it most of the time for wildlife. I really like it for everything but low light. I print to 24 by 36 with no problems.
I took it on a hike to Half Dome in Yosemite last year on my 7D, as well as subsequently carrying it around San Fran the next week. Great results and so nice to only have on lens to deal with. Regrets? On a crop, there are a handful of times I wanted something wider, however I was able to stitch together some panorama shots in Adobe that made up for the majority of times I wished I had something wider.
The only thing that would caution me is the current pricing of the thing. I got a bargain-grade copy in Summer 2010 for $1,400 via KEH. Prices are much higher now. Will they come back down anytime soon? No idea, but something to consider. Maybe all lenses have just gone up, who knows...
gocolts wrote:
Maybe all lenses have just gone up, who knows...
Yep, higher energy costs and inflation translates into higher overhead: insurance, materials, manufacturing, shipping, wages/benefits, interest rates, etc. It's pretty difficult to reduce the retail price when it costs more to do business. Lots of states cut business tax credits to bump up tax revenues and that means we all pay a little more. Heck, even Burgerking raised prices a lot last year.
I have it in my bag whenever I travel. It's not a pixel peeper's lens but it works fine on my 1Ds3 and 5D2, and I love it for what it does. If I want ultimate sharpness or low light performance I grab something else, but for versatility it can't be beat. Have some 24x36" prints made with it and I never had people say "dude that picture looks like it came from a hyperzoom".
I have no doubt this is the best quality "super zoom" lens available.
The main issue I have with it (conceptually) is that I am aware that for APS-C, the EF-S 18-200 IS gives the exact same range, yet is about 1/3 the size and weight and 1/4 the cost. When I think of that lens paired with a 60D (which has an excellent sensor) vs. the 28-300 on a 1Ds3 or 5D2... I know which rig would win in terms of absolute IQ, but I suspect the results may be closer than expected, and I know which one I'd rather carry around...
It would be interesting to hear opinions from those who have used both (though somehow I doubt there's much overlap )
Incidentally, I've had the same thoughts about the 100-400L IS vs. the EF-S 55-250 IS...
The 28-300 was my first DSLR lens and while I've collected numerous other more specialized lenses over the years, it continues to be the one that I grab when going to outdoor events where I don't know what I'll encounter.
It's big and heavy (mounted on a 1Ds w/580 it's over 7 lbs.) It's also a bit slow (it's at f5.6 long before 300mm) and not particularly sharp. But, given its versatility it apologizes to nobody.
I can't answer your question fully because I haven't used the 18-200 MUCH, but I have used it some and boy does that lens suck compared to the 28-300. But at least for me, the answer is much more fundamental: I started out with a 1Ds3 / 5D2 (well, 1Ds in 2004) and needed to add a hyper zoom to it. It's not that I set out with the intention to get the most convenient or even best SLR hyper zoom. I started out with a FF sensor. Buying an extra body just so I could screw a compact hyperzoom onto it would have undermined the very idea of making the most out of only one addition to my photo bag.
I'll be at napa this weekend and will give this lens a try. For those of you that own the 28-300, do u generally shoot at a minimum f/8? From the reviews I've read, that seems to be the sweet spot. I'll post picture upon my return
stanj wrote:
I have it in my bag whenever I travel. It's not a pixel peeper's lens but it works fine on my 1Ds3 and 5D2, and I love it for what it does. If I want ultimate sharpness or low light performance I grab something else, but for versatility it can't be beat. Have some 24x36" prints made with it and I never had people say "dude that picture looks like it came from a hyperzoom".
Hi Stan,
Any problems with distortion at 28mm? Easily correctable in LR3?
datousteve wrote:
For those of you that own the 28-300, do u generally shoot at a minimum f/8?
I shoot usually one stop stopped down from maximum. That would make it f5.6 at the wide end. Actually I wish that the fancy cameras had a setting to allow for this; "f/whatever wide open + 1 stop", would be great for variable zooms, no?
Barrel is pretty bad at 28 but barely visible at 35, and in any case super easy to fix with LR3. I created my own profile for the lens before it was officially supported, and it was the best two hour investment in a long time
stanj wrote:
I shoot usually one stop stopped down from maximum. That would make it f5.6 at the wide end. Actually I wish that the fancy cameras had a setting to allow for this; "f/whatever wide open + 1 stop", would be great for variable zooms, no?
Barrel is pretty bad at 28 but barely visible at 35, and in any case super easy to fix with LR3. I created my own profile for the lens before it was officially supported, and it was the best two hour investment in a long time
Your "one stop down from maximum" camera setting idea is one of the best I've heard in a while.
stanj wrote:
I shoot usually one stop stopped down from maximum.
datousteve wrote:
Thanks for the tip. Since I don't like re-adjusting aperture while I zoom, I'll just consider it a f/8 zoom.
I assume this tip is specifically related to this lens because I love to shoot open with the 70-200
Well, not JUST this lens - pretty much all of them benefit from closing down a bit. I shoot most of my fast primes at f2 unless I'm forced to go more open, for instance. The 70-200 is a notable exception because (1) it's so good wide open and (2) 2.8 ain't all that fast compared to the other speciality lenses in the bag. In other words, if I wanted to shoot it at f4, I'd get the f4 flavor of the lens
Of course it does Stan... and it's sensible to choose gear based on maximum image quality and your existing kit. I was just sharing my own thoughts re. convenience and portability. Wish the 18-200 were better...
