Comment on a couple of lenses

[martcol]

EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

Anyone got anything to say, or any experience of these?

martin

[TweetyRN]

I had the 75-300IS and loved it! It was sharp, light. In low light it did tend to hunt for focusing though. I upgraded to a 70-200L lens for just a little bit more and really love the new lens! The images are much sharper, and the image quality holds up very well with the 1.4 tele-extender.
Here is a link for some picture examples of the 75-300 IS. Hope this is helpful.
http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/view?p=999&gid=1915941&uid=985813

[henkbos]

I just replaced the 75-300 with 2 primes: 135 f/2L and 300 f/4L. No comparison, you know why you pay more.

[TweetyRN]

henkbos wrote:
I just replaced the 75-300 with 2 primes: 135 f/2L and 300 f/4L. No comparison, you know why you pay more.

I also have the 135 F2 and have found it to be an outstanding lens!!!! Very v ersatile with a tele-extender and on the other end of the scale with extension tubes. I just got the 200 2.8 L and I am super pleased with it.
I guess I am an L gal. People should not discount the L glass until they check the prices. Some are just a little bit more and worth every penny!!!

[Marley]

I just ordered 2 new lenses.
They haven't arrived yet and I'm curious if anyone has experience with these?

Canon 15mm 2.8 Fisheye
Canon 85mm 1.8

sorry for the hijack but I didn't feel we needed yet
another thread on Lens suggestions.....

[martcol]

marley wrote:

sorry for the hijack but I didn't feel we needed yet
another thread on Lens suggestions.....


Marley the Moderator - I'm sorry about the hijack too. I'm just looking for people's direct experience of two specific lenses. I didn't want to encourage a new "what lens" discussion. Anyway, It's great getting people's comments and I welcome the advice of others with more experience. I'm already looking forward to hearing how you get on with your two new lenses. Getting new kit is great! 8)

Martin

[robertwgross]

I own those very two lenses. However, you did not state what you are trying to accomplish, so it is difficult to state their suitability.

---Bob Gross---

[martcol]

Thanks Bob

First, a hint at how they perform would be great and then, I'm into street photography and kind of still-life, sort of. I take my camera everywhere so I suppose, will take pictures of everything. Having said that, my talent is mmm... burgeoning ;)

Apart from the cheapo 50mm which is great, I have yet to make my mind up on how to develop my lenses. This is proving to be the trickiest part. What I suppose I want is a kind of "walkabout" lens that will work well with my 10D. Initially, I was drawn to the 28-135 IS USM lens but the extra bit of range is now appealing. I also think that eventually, I will get something wide as well.

Oh there it is, soon this will be yet another thread....

Thanks again

Martin

[Fried]

Hi,
I have the 28-135 IS and the 75-300 IS.
As I do much travel photo, the L lenses are to heavy for me. En plus, in many occasions I cannot use a tripod, so the IS comes in handy.
The weak point of these lenses IMO is quality control, if you get one, be shure to have the possibility to give it back in case you have a lemon by your own judgement.
Fried

[mwind13]

I used to own both the 28-200 and the 75-300 IS lenses.

The 28-200 was my first Canon EOS lense. I enjoyed this lense. Didn't have to worry about swapping lenses for most things.

The 75-300 IS lense provided the extra zooming, but it was a little slow in dusk conditions. (When I was in Hawaii, I used this lense to take a picture of a whale. Due to the slowness -- due to the above light conditions, I was only able to capture the tail when the whale had come up.) It works well in good lighting, though. So it depends on when/how you want to the lense.

I did replace these lenses with L series lenses (f/2.8) that covered 28-70, 70-200 and a 2X extender, but this is a more expensive option than the two lenses you are referring.

[martcol]

Thanks for your help and advice there everyone.

I think that I might plump for the 28-135 IS USM in the end and then a bit later, the 70 to 300 for that extra telephoto when I need it.

These are my first real, thought-through lens purchases so, I am quite nervous about it all. It's also harder because this is my first SLR and I am still finding my way around the camera and settling for a style of photography. What I wanted to check out mostly was whether either of the lenses I started the thread with were poor performers in terms of image quality I suppose. Slow etc. I think I can live with.

Eventually, I will buy L lenses but this is a way off yet.

Martin

[droosan]

I have had the 75-300 for 6-7 years, and have caught many of my favorite pictures with it over the years. However, a couple years ago I got a 200/2.8L and since then my 75-300 has hardly left my bag. The main reason: the instant focus of the 200/2.8.

I never miss a picture with the 200/2.8, trying to get focus. If my subject is alive, this is critical for me.