Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 L IS USM

[fWord]

After having this lens for perhaps two weeks, today was the first chance I got to take it outdoors for a shoot. Previously I did some basic tests indoors and on a tripod, and the results were quite surprising in that this lens can produce images with good quality despite its very expansive and controversial zoom range:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=251518

Since a trip to the zoo is quite a big undertaking for me, I instead went to the Botanical Gardens, a nice pocket of peace and greenery. Here I ended up testing the 300mm end almost exclusively, and also shot subjects near the MFD. All these were done handheld, hence the subpar quality in some cases. After today's shoot I made a few observations.

This thing is a beast! It's extremely heavy. On a 1-series body the whole thing feels a little back-heavy but otherwise well-balanced. When extended fully it can be a challenge to handle for the not-so-strong. After handling it and shooting continuously for only three and a half hours, I'm now feeling the strain especially in my right hand.

It is a push-pull zoom, just like the popular 100-400mm. But Canon seems to have (consciously or unconsciously) added something else to the functionality of this zoom. In the past when I used the 100-400mm, I noticed that if I pointed the camera downwards without tightening the zoom friction ring, the lens would extend and finally stop with a hard 'clunk'. In the 28-300mm, there is some resistance between the 200-300mm mark. Hence if the lens is pointed downwards by accident, the lens seems to extend but stop short of hitting its end.

Conversely, once the lens is at the 300mm mark, there appears to be a 'soft lock' and if the camera is tilted upside down, the lens does not retract back even if the zoom friction ring has been completely loosened. This is a very nice feature! That said I always ensure I retract the lens completely and tighten the ring before moving anywhere.

Image quality, although good, obviously doesn't get anywhere near that of prime lenses, but it may be able to rival consumer zooms with much more conservative zoom ratios. RAW images needed slightly more aggressive sharpening (Level 4 in DPP), but once done the images get their 'pop', as can be expected. This lens is impressively sharp at the middle of its zoom range. It appears to be softer at either of its ends, but then again, not consistently. I suspect there's a learning curve involved.

I have no complaints about focusing speed, which is decent by any standards, and particularly impressive considering the zoom range. IS is a beauty...all three stops worth of it. It's especially important when you consider that the weight will eventually tire you, and handshake becomes even more severe. It allowed me to handhold at 1/8s for a photo of a small man-made waterfall...long enough to get a silky water effect.

This lens has excellent close-focusing abilities. While it won't get you frame-filling photos of small dragonflies, it is great for flowers and small animals still. Paired together with a 500D closeup filter, it might make for a good naturalist's lens. This lens, plus a 400mm f/5.6L or 500mm f/4L on a 1D-series is conceivably very nice for a safari.

So anyway, while I'm not sure how long this thread will last, and how long I'll keep this lens (because it's too heavy for me), here's some purely demonstrative (not meant to be artistic) photos from my first outdoor trip with the 28-300mm 'Perfect Partner'.

Fall in love. ;)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/s1ckpuppy/FABE7353.jpg

This dragonfly is pretty small:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/s1ckpuppy/FABE7378.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/s1ckpuppy/FABE7420.jpg

A waterfall at 1/8s:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/s1ckpuppy/FABE7435.jpg

Barrels of cactus at 300mm:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/s1ckpuppy/FABE7448.jpg

A toad at 300mm:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/s1ckpuppy/FABE7455.jpg

And the obligatory duck shot:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/s1ckpuppy/FABE7403.jpg

[G35Driver]

are you the only one with this lens? is this lens that bad or is it that its just too expensive?

[asylumxl]

Too expensive. It's a good lens, but people avoid superzooms, even if it is a good one.

[kahren]

those pics look great

[rajastan5]

I love the waterfall pic. What kind of PP did you use on that one?

[NickSimcheck]

I'd like to have one for the heck of it, but dang it's a lot of money to pay for not getting the best IQ.

But in most situations I'd rather have the image then miss it entirely cause I was switching lenses ya know?

[fWord]

are you the only one with this lens? is this lens that bad or is it that its just too expensive?

Nope. There are another one or two on this forum who have used, or are currently using this lens. Look up a member at these forums named 'chancellor', and you'll find its major supporter!

It's not a bad lens as far as superzooms go and I admire the weather sealing, IS and build quality. In practice it's very fun to use, even if a bit heavy. Give me the chance and I'd buy it again.

[fWord]

those pics look great

Thank you for the kind comment. These are just test pics...quite horribly done on top of that.

[fWord]

I love the waterfall pic. What kind of PP did you use on that one?

Little PP was used on any of these photos. They were shot in RAW and converted to JPEG on Canon Digital Photo Professional. The usual Picture Style and little sharpening was applied. The silky water appearance is a result of the use of a slower shutter speed.

[fWord]

I'd like to have one for the heck of it, but dang it's a lot of money to pay for not getting the best IQ.

But in most situations I'd rather have the image then miss it entirely cause I was switching lenses ya know?

It's quite expensive to buy new, but back in the days when I bought mine, I paid relatively little for it on the second-hand market. I regret having sold it to upgrade from the 1D. Now it's so rare I doubt if I could find it again. However, given the chance, I would definitely try it again.

Indeed it's great to be able to use a setup and not worry about changing lenses in most circumstances.

[Lightstream]

Actually, the pics are quite good. Hmmm....... :)

Even changing bodies takes time and god forbid you have different settings on different bodies at that instant of time ;)

I'm sorta-almost-even-tempted..

[MaDProFF]

Would you say that the IQ is as good at 300mm as a 100-400 at 400mm??

[woollyback]

MaDProFF,

What a good question - that is exactly what I was thinking.
Our 100-400 @ 400 doesn't seem too bad mind.

Rob

[MaDProFF]

MaDProFF,

What a good question - that is exactly what I was thinking.
Our 100-400 @ 400 doesn't seem too bad mind.

Rob

I have a 100-400 as well, and if that 28-300 is as good IQ and sharp as the 400 @ 400 I might be very Tempted, it is dammed expensive though :(

[CyberDyneSystems]

With the possible exception of the Cactus (coincedentally) and maybe the duck, even for web sized images these look soft to me.

[woollyback]

Your right, it is expensive but could replace 2-3 lenses so maybe it's not that bad

Couls end up with 28-300, 100-400 & 500 prime .

What do you reckon?.

Rob

[fWord]

Whoops...forgot to check back here for a while...

Lightstream- Tempting isn't it? I'm tempted to pick this lens up myself at the end of the year if I can find a seller. Kinda regret selling it now. Should have used it for a longer period to see what else it can do. On a 1D Classic then, it was great fun. Should never have sold it, but rather, forked out additional cash to upgrade the camera body and keep the lens at the same time.

MaDProFF & woollyback- This is a tough question to answer since I've never had both lenses to compare side by side. However for the most part, the 28-300mm lens @ 300mm renders images of comparable definition against the 100-400mm @ 400mm. Where both lenses fall apart seems to be in lower light conditions, and I reckon the 28-300mm doesn't perform as well at the closest focusing distances.

The 28-300mm on one camera, and the 500mm prime on another would actually be a great combo for safari, I assume. And I don't think the light there would be quite as bad as that I had when doing some of these test shots (pretty much in deep shade or overcast sky).

CyberDyneSystems- Agreed with you. The photos were taken in the shade. Plus, I was experimenting with a new method of photographing closeups handheld- I used the appropriate AF point of the 1D on the subject while using AI servo, hoping the continual AF will compensate for the rocking back and forth of my body that so often occurs when doing closeups.

So the softness may indeed be attributable to user error. The above method was used for the flower and the dragonfly shot, and the lens was used at minimum focusing distance. The cactus, toad, duck and waterfall photos were taken with conventional methods. The toad's eye is remarkably sharp and I was surprised.

When shooting bottles in an earlier thread, the lens didn't perform tremendously either, but the real-world photos (when done correctly), seem to show the lens' true colors.

[gpx4]

+ 1

With the possible exception of the Cactus (coincedentally) and maybe the duck, even for web sized images these look soft to me.

[ypx3]

Very tempted

[bmitch]

Greetings! Just registered on the board and wanted to throw my weight (pun intended) behind the 28-300. Yeah, it's heavy but we have carried ours around for long days at Disney and you get used to the weight very quickly.

As far as really putting it through its paces, I'll be honest we've had the thing for about 6 months and we haven't really given it a hard workout yet to find any flaws. For what we've used it for up to now though I'm very happy.

[fWord]

Greetings! Just registered on the board and wanted to throw my weight (pun intended) behind the 28-300. Yeah, it's heavy but we have carried ours around for long days at Disney and you get used to the weight very quickly.

As far as really putting it through its paces, I'll be honest we've had the thing for about 6 months and we haven't really given it a hard workout yet to find any flaws. For what we've used it for up to now though I'm very happy.

That's great...do let us know how things progress. It'd be a good lens I imagine, for those who never want to change lenses on most of their trips. I don't have it anymore but would gladly buy it back the first chance I get.

[fubarhouse]

Didn't realise this lens was this scarce. I own and love this lens, it is relativly good for quality, definitly not the best, but far from the worst, and I am very happy with it overall, even though it's only real issues are price and weight, which is easily resolved with a monopod.

Here are some examples I took while using this lens:

http://www.fubarhouse.com.au/canon/28-300/003.jpg

http://www.fubarhouse.com.au/canon/28-300/002.jpg

http://www.fubarhouse.com.au/canon/lens/28-300/002.jpg

[NeoTokyo]

For so much money couldnt you just get a 70-200 2.8 IS with a 2x Tc and bank the rest? :D

Honestly I am not that impressed by the images but I look forward to more to come.

[fWord]

Didn't realise this lens was this scarce. I own and love this lens, it is relativly good for quality, definitly not the best, but far from the worst, and I am very happy with it overall, even though it's only real issues are price and weight, which is easily resolved with a monopod.

Here are some examples I took while using this lens:



Yes, I agree with that assessment. Not the best image quality, but for the convenience, some are willing to give up a bit. There are a fair number of copies on sale at Ebay, but at a Singapore forum where I used to hang out, it's rare as hen's teeth.

[fWord]

For so much money couldnt you just get a 70-200 2.8 IS with a 2x Tc and bank the rest? :D

Honestly I am not that impressed by the images but I look forward to more to come.

That's partly true. However I'd lose the 28-69mm range, which I find to be quite useful. It's almost a standard zoom in that range alone.

The lens is about compromises, but considering what it offers, I don't think you lose a whole lot. My main beef with it was the incredible weight, especially mated with a 1-series camera. But if I were shooting from a vehicle, boat or even a plane, there's no lens that I would rather have.

[fubarhouse]

I will post some more at the end of the month, I should have media access to a burnout show and show n' shine, so you can see this lens in real practice, I can't wait for it! The only real rewason people would ever consider this lens is because of it's Wide Angle and the long end. Something similar to do the job would be a 18-200. This lens really is a awesome papparazi tool.

I'll be getting a 35-350L soon purely for collectors value, surprised there aren't any archive photos from that lens.

[fWord]

I will post some more at the end of the month, I should have media access to a burnout show and show n' shine, so you can see this lens in real practice, I can't wait for it! The only real rewason people would ever consider this lens is because of it's Wide Angle and the long end. Something similar to do the job would be a 18-200. This lens really is a awesome papparazi tool.

I'll be getting a 35-350L soon purely for collectors value, surprised there aren't any archive photos from that lens.

It'd be good to see more photos from this lens. Would have kept it if I could, but it was heck of a lot of money for a lens.

[fubarhouse]

It'd be good to see more photos from this lens. Would have kept it if I could, but it was heck of a lot of money for a lens.

Yes, and you'd be surprised how well it proforms in a sporting condition - in daylight of course!

http://www.fubarhouse.com.au/distribution/2008_south_coast_nationals/001.jpg

http://www.fubarhouse.com.au/distribution/2008_south_coast_nationals/002.jpg

http://www.fubarhouse.com.au/distribution/2008_south_coast_nationals/004.jpg

http://www.fubarhouse.com.au/distribution/2008_south_coast_nationals/005.jpg


This was my first chance to take it out and to get some action shots with it, and I swear by this lens, it always excells my expectations!
The first one here is a tad soft, however the other three are razor sharp!!

[fWord]

Yes, and you'd be surprised how well it proforms in a sporting condition - in daylight of course!


This was my first chance to take it out and to get some action shots with it, and I swear by this lens, it always excells my expectations!
The first one here is a tad soft, however the other three are razor sharp!!

If it's offering you results that are pleasing, then it's a very versatile lens indeed...shoot the vehicles on the track one moment, and the next you can be photographing the crowd around you!

[SOT]

Original
http://cqbarms.com/canon/albums/userpics/TP51C.jpg

http://cqbarms.com/canon/albums/userpics/normal_TP51C.jpg

f/10 @ 300

[fWord]

Original
http://cqbarms.com/canon/albums/userpics/TP51C.jpg

f/10 @ 300

Gee, I can see the co pilot's smile in the original image. When I see things like this it makes me take a step back and wonder if we are all complaining too much about issues with sharpness. Such a level of detail and grain-free appearance would have been unheard of a decade ago.

[SOT]

For me the fact that you can see the antennas pretty well and they doen't seem to break up, that's good.

I personally love this lens. I have a whole bunch of other lenses but I use this one most of all. It's a little heavy but I've gotten used to it and it isn't as heavy as carrying a bag with three different lenses that can cover the range.
I've gotten pretty quick with the slide telephoto, and find it quicker in many instances.
It certainly isn't as sharp as my 300 f/2.8L prime, but then again to me that is a whole different game and about $1200 more.
The one "drawback", it's primarily a good light lens. Works well in open shade and on most overcast days, but really performs in good light.

[fWord]

For me the fact that you can see the antennas pretty well and they doen't seem to break up, that's good.

I personally love this lens. I have a whole bunch of other lenses but I use this one most of all. It's a little heavy but I've gotten used to it and it isn't as heavy as carrying a bag with three different lenses that can cover the range.
I've gotten pretty quick with the slide telephoto, and find it quicker in many instances.
It certainly isn't as sharp as my 300 f/2.8L prime, but then again to me that is a whole different game and about $1200 more.
The one "drawback", it's primarily a good light lens. Works well in open shade and on most overcast days, but really performs in good light.

When I did have this lens in the past I was quite put off by the weight. But in recent times I bought some ginormous 400mm f/5 manual focus telephoto and it weighs just about as much, if not more. Yet when I had it mounted to my 1Ds and roamed around with it, photographing kangaroos on sloping ground, I had little issue trekking around with it.

All a matter of getting used to things I suppose, and perhaps I should, if I ever plan on buying a 500mm f/4L within the next 10 years! :lol:

[NeoTokyo]

I just got a 24-105mm F4 IS a couple weeks ago and I love it and its fairly cheap too at just over $1000 bux for a new one from B&H.

So you could do a 24-105, 70-200mm 2.8 IS and a 1.4tc :D
Or you could do a 24-70, the 70-200mm and the 1.4tx :P

Anyways though I see where this lens comes in handy. When packing light or some venue restrictions this would be a killer workhorse.
My wife gets mad at me for having 3 other lenses in my Camera bag that my 24-105mm replaces now and has better optics +IS. But I just cant seem to pull them out! :P

[fWord]

I just got a 24-105mm F4 IS a couple weeks ago and I love it and its fairly cheap too at just over $1000 bux for a new one from B&H.

So you could do a 24-105, 70-200mm 2.8 IS and a 1.4tc :D
Or you could do a 24-70, the 70-200mm and the 1.4tx :P

Anyways though I see where this lens comes in handy. When packing light or some venue restrictions this would be a killer workhorse.
My wife gets mad at me for having 3 other lenses in my Camera bag that my 24-105mm replaces now and has better optics +IS. But I just cant seem to pull them out! :P

Well I'm sure your wife understands that having spares is certainly not a bad idea. ;)

[Xantho]

Any updated opinions or pictures with this lens? Looking to purchase, thanks.

[katodog]

Nope, you don't get any new info. I would offer some, but I just got the lens in about 20 minutes ago, and haven't gotten out to use it except for shooting through my patio door at my feeders. Which, as I'm looking at the few test shots, I can easily say that this lens shows better sharpness through my patio door than my other lenses have, except for my Sig 150-500mm. Any other lens I've shot through the glass have been okay, but not as sharp as the 28-300mm.

Here's one full frame crop, and I'll tell you, looking at this shot I know for a fact that this lens will be sharp as a friggin' tack outside...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_5560.jpg

[katodog]

Another full-frame crop. No processing on either shot except for in-camera processing...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_5586.jpg

[fWord]

...except for my Sig 150-500mm.

Speaking of the Sigma, how are you finding it? I'm lacking a telezoom in my current setup but worried about the speed of AF, or that the OS wouldn't work if attached to a 1Ds MKI.

[katodog]

In all honesty, if you want my opinions of the Sig, you should look through the archive for that lens, and search the boards for threads about it. I've sung the praises of this lens numerous times. It's an excellent lens, and I love it, but every time I talk about it Canon people jump all over me.

I guess the 100-400mm has such a following that any threat to it's sanctity are quashed pretty quick. I'd put my Sig against any 100-400mm any day of the week, and twice on Saturday. It's comes as close as you could possibly get to Canon "L" quality without the hefty price tag, and longer reach that Canon's closest competition.

I've used the Canon, and it's a spectacular lens, but it doesn't have as much going for it as the Sig does, and you're paying a lot more for shorter reach. And I am not against Canon, obviously, since I own Canon lenses.

[fWord]

In all honesty, if you want my opinions of the Sig, you should look through the archive for that lens, and search the boards for threads about it. I've sung the praises of this lens numerous times. It's an excellent lens, and I love it, but every time I talk about it Canon people jump all over me.

I guess the 100-400mm has such a following that any threat to it's sanctity are quashed pretty quick. I'd put my Sig against any 100-400mm any day of the week, and twice on Saturday. It's comes as close as you could possibly get to Canon "L" quality without the hefty price tag, and longer reach that Canon's closest competition.

I've used the Canon, and it's a spectacular lens, but it doesn't have as much going for it as the Sig does, and you're paying a lot more for shorter reach. And I am not against Canon, obviously, since I own Canon lenses.

Heheh, I'm all for 3rd party and alternative glass, so I'd be one of the last people to jump on you for liking a Sigma lens. Again, the one drawback I've read about the lens is the slow AF, slower than the Bigma apparently, but perhaps you may be able to verify that for me. Prior to the arrival of the Bigmos I was looking at the Sigma 80-400mm OS as well which looked like a good option against the Canon L.

I've used the Canon 100-400 before but wasn't terribly impressed. Perhaps it was something to do with my long-lens technique at that time, or the AF of the Rebel XT, but the results were very chancy. Sometimes excellent, sometimes not so good. Naturally, I would love to own the 500L, but that's going to take some saving...

[katodog]

Let's take this discussion over to that archive for that lens, i don't want to bog this thread down with info that isn't about the 28-300mm.


Bigmos archive (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=514846)

[katodog]

Here's two more, full-frame crops. The first doesn't look all that spectacular, but the second isn't bad.


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_5658.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_5725.jpg



One full shot, resized 50%, and a little processing...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_5723.jpg



I was trying to shoot the shots while the feeder was swinging back and forth. It wasn't too easy to do with the lens stuck out the door and it raining. It's fun trying to take pictures while keeping your brand new lens dry.

[mrcoons]

Katodog, Thanks for sharing these, where they shot hand held?

[katodog]

They were handheld. The goldfinch shots could have been better, but I was on ISO100 when I shot them. If I would have been paying attention I would have bumped it up to about ISO500. But, they're still pretty decent. I love this lens, it's really nice. I didn't realize until I uploaded the shots to the computer that the head came out goofy looking. I have some grackles shots at the feeders that came out the same, the colors were fantastic, and the full shots look good when viewed zoomed out, but zoom in full-frame and they are too smooth and chunky. No biggie. At least i can see the lens produces some pretty great color tones. ISO100 really stinks sometimes.

It's just up to me to remember that I do in fact know a little about photography and remember to change settings once in a while instead of just whipping out the camera and thinking it's going to adjust itself.

[mrcoons]

It's just up to me to remember that I do in fact know a little about photography and remember to change settings once in a while instead of just whipping out the camera and thinking it's going to adjust itself.

I can relate! :)

I plan on renting this lens this summer for an event I will be covering and can't wait to get a hold of one!

[katodog]

Where are you in Illinois. If you're close enough, you can test out mine.

[mrcoons]

Where are you in Illinois. If you're close enough, you can test out mine.

A ways south of you, Bloomington/Normal.

[katodog]

That's not way south, that's just regular south. Way south is Georgia.

Heck, it's only a boring drive up or down 55. Probably a 2 hour drive, 1 hour if you're only going halfway.

[katodog]

A Goldfinch with the lens...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/Goldfinch001.jpg

[katodog]

Few more goldfinch shots with this lens...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/IMG_1698.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/IMG_1712.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/IMG_1722.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/IMG_1735.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/IMG_1758.jpg


And a mourning dove...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/IMG_1755.jpg

[katodog]

A shot of one of the mourning dove chicks in the wood pile at the neighbor across the street. I used the on-board flash for this shot.


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_1126.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_1126a.jpg

[katodog]

Here's a few more to add to this very small thread. Geez, is this lens really one that nobody owns?? I like the lens a lot, and I can't figure out why there isn't a lot more people with it. I know it's expensive, but what "L" glass isn't?



http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_2801.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_2853.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_2873.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_2917.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_2935.jpg

[katodog]

Three more. I had the lens at my inlaws this weekend, which is surrounded by wide open farmland, and I should have taken some wide shots with this lens. We'll be out there Memorial weekend, so I'm gonna get some wider shots with the lens to see how it does.


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_3495.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_3540.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Canon%2028-300mm/_MG_3597.jpg

[mrcoons]

A very sharp lens! I am still saving my pennies towards one of these lenses!! If only these darn kids didn't want to go to college!!

[katodog]

Here's a few from today, Willowbrook Wildlife Center. One of the keepers was walking around with this Merlin, so I dropped the 20D/Bigmos and pulled out the 40D/28-300mm. Couldn't resist, and I didn't feel like backing up 5 feet to use the Bigmos. I've got some more to put up, but I'm still going through the shots from today so give me a few minutes...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/Merlin001.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/Mer*****op001.jpg

[katodog]

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/Merlin002.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/Mer*****op002.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/Merlin003.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/Mer*****op003.jpg

[katodog]

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/_MG_9962.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/_MG_9962Crop.jpg


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/_MG_0028.jpg

[katodog]

Here's the latest to add to the collection. I'm beginning to think that the lens is the dud of the Canon family, since nobody seems to think too highly of it. My shooting style sucks, my experience is amateur at best, and I seem to manage some great shots with this lens. I can't believe that more people don't give the lens a chance.

Of course, I realize that the weight and price are a big poopie for some people, but I say take a chance and try it. You might find that you like it.


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_0907.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_0905.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_0815.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_0817-1.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_0832.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_0836.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_0866.jpg



These shots lost a little in the upload, but they still look pretty dang good. All shot with the 28-300mm on my 40D, used a flash and did the best I could with focus. This is my first run at shooting anything like this when the light was almost gone. The sun was down already, but it was still light out enough to see somewhat. I figured it was time to give the flash-for-birding a try, and the hummingbirds didn't seem to mind.

They did get a little jumpy from the shutter noise, but not enough to scare them too bad.

[katodog]

We've had a robin nest on our electric meter on the side of the house. I've been trying to catch pics of the bird-hatching process, but mommy robin is very protective, which is good, and I can never venture closer than about 8 feet. This morning I go out to see what's going on, and I see that the babies are out of the nest. There were four eggs, but I could never see if there were four babies. Today I only see three, so maybe one didn't hatch. Don't know.

But anyway, they're sitting in some branches I have laying by the side of the house, which are perfectly positioned under my bedroom window. So, I stuck my head out with the 28-300mm to snatch a few shots before mommy started to protest. Here are shots of two of the babies, the third one is hidden where I can't get shots of it.


Click this one for a larger shot...

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_1074.jpg (http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_1074-1.jpg)

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_1074Crop.jpg


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_1043.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_1052.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_1091.jpg



And mommy...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_1097.jpg

[Karl Johnston]

Some of these pictures look extremely soft.

On the other hand page 4 looks extremely sharp.

[katodog]

Some of my shots were soft when I first got the lens, it was a hard lens to figure out. Some of my shots were through a window too. But, the more I use the lens the better the shots get. I still get a few clinkers, but not as many as when I started. I think that's part of the reason why people don't own this lens, it seems to be one of those lenses that take a while to get used to, and it might not produce the best images all the time.

So far I've been extremely happy with my lens.

[fWord]

Some of these pictures look extremely soft.

On the other hand page 4 looks extremely sharp.

My short experience with this lens tells me it's not the sharpest one in the house, but respectable all the same given the focal length range. Given the complexity of the design to allow for IS, and add weather-sealing on top of that, it's actually nice piece of kit. Expensive yes, but there's no other lens out there that does what it can do. The newer Tamron 28-300mm VC shows some promise but a number of images I've seen from this lens are soft as a baby's bottom. Maybe that's forgivable given the Tamron is fraction of the Canon's price. Albeit with no weather sealing.

The Canon is actually respectably sharp throughout although it's strength seems to be in the middle focal length range. For a faster moving event in good light this lens would come in really handy. I guess you wouldn't want to waste time switching lenses when you could simply zoom in or out and just fire away. This assumes you don't have the time, or can't change your vantage point either. For a real all-in-one travel lens for the photography enthusiast, I can't think of a better one.

[katodog]

Some of these pictures look extremely soft.


Yes, they do. But what lens out there doesn't have a soft shot now and then? Plus, this isn't exactly the lens someone is going to buy for its sharpness. This is more of a top-notch "convenience" lens, and not a top-notch "serious image" lens. Although in my experience it does pretty good.


Here are a few recent shots. Shot in JPG with the 40D, and no processing (except for in-camera). Click the full shots for larger images.


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4499.jpg (http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4499-1.jpg)

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4499crop.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4501.jpg (http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4501-1.jpg)

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4501crop.jpg

[katodog]

Here are some from yesterday at the zoo. Unfortunately the baby orangutan wasn't staying still, so I got some motion blur.


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5726.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5676.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5354.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5379.jpg



The next two were through the glass, so I had to process for contrast and sharpness. Still good images...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_4969.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_4940.jpg

[Mtn Breeze]

They should re-title this thread........ " The Katodog benefit thread".......:D.



Na,na.....just jesting Kato. You've got some really good shots there. I'm currently looking at one on 'Trademe" here in N.Z.

[katodog]

Sometimes a thread can go for quite a long time with only one or two people posting images. I've seen it a lot. This one is a tricky one because not very many people own this lens, or they don't want to admit it. I contribute to the archives because I use the archives. It's a great resource to find images taken by various people with various bodies of various subjects with one particular lens.

Plus, it's a good source to find people who have experience with one particular lens, you can get a whole range of info when looking to buy a lens. You get the full range, from "It Sucks" to "It's the greatest lens made by God himself". It's helps figure out what a good lens is because you're getting real-world usage and results, not just a cookie-cutter review done by people who don't spend a lot of time with the lens.

[katodog]

Here's some more to add. I used the lens to shoot an RC Airshow Sunday, and was happy to see that the shots came out better than I thought they would. Some of these planes were flying fairly fast, and it was hard to keep up with them sometimes, but I managed some decent shots. I wouldn't have thought this lens was a good match for stuff like this, but it did pretty good. These are all crops, since the planes look far off in the full frames...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/RC%20Airshow/_MG_9999.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/RC%20Airshow/_MG_9956.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/RC%20Airshow/_MG_9898.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/RC%20Airshow/_MG_9773.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/RC%20Airshow/_MG_9694.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/RC%20Airshow/_MG_9679.jpg



There's a lot more shots, and shots with my Sig 150-500mm OS (which surprisingly did pretty good), in my Flickr and Photobucket. These aren't the sharpest, but I think I did pretty good, and the lens did great, for the first time shooting this type of subject. It sure was a workout sometimes trying to keep up with some of the planes. And trying to follow them while the pilots were doing turns and flips was a real trick too.

[katodog]

Here's a few from today. Sunflowers sprouted from the dropped seed where I had the feeders, and the goldfinches like to eat them. The second and third were almost at MFD. Processing was slight sharpness, saturation, and resized 50%. To be honest, in these it looks like the lens might have front-focused ever so slightly. Enough to make the leaf in the front a tad sharper than the bird. I guess it's time to test the focus of the lens, I'm not worried about it, but it'd be nice to know...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4417.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4432.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4326.jpg

[katodog]

These are center crops from unprocessed shots. Soft, but not soft enough that simple processing couldn't make these a lot better. Plus, different light and exposure might sharpen these up too.



http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4409crop.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4431crop.jpg

[mrcoons]

Love the air show photos, very nice!

[katodog]

A shot from today, another example that this lens is better than people give it credit for. Not that this is a stellar image, or that it's perfect, but would you honestly toss this one in the bin??



http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/_MG_5346.jpg

[katodog]

Today's additions to the "Katodog Canon 28-300mm IS L Relief" thread. Shot with a 20D...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5396a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5524a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5562a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5325a.jpg

[mrcoons]

Were these taken at Brookfield Kato? I really like #3. Very sharp.

[katodog]

Yes they were. Here's a few more...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5336a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5092a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5484a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5574a.jpg

[mrcoons]

Great shots, thanks for sharing.

My savings for this lens took a hit a couple of weeks ago. I found a used 5D in my price range and jumped on it. So now my funds are low again. :cry: But on the other hand I really am enjoying the 5D. :D

[katodog]

Surprisingly, these next shots aren't of goldfinches...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_5607a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_5658a.jpg

[Pixel Boy]

Iv got a 28-300 IS L f2.8 and i love it, it is heavy, it is expensive but it is worth it... however i dont know what its like compared to the 70-200 IS L with an extender, does any1 have the 70-200 IS L with a couple of images?? and which would you guys go for if you had a couple of £ to spear?

[katodog]

Here's a shot from today. Click the uncropped image for a full-sized shot...



http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_1312a.jpg (http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_1312.jpg)

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_1312crop.jpg

[slomaroz]

Katodog thanks for posting all of these images. Seems like you really have gotten the hang of shooting with that lens.

I'm looking for a more convenient setup for red carpet shooting than bouncing around between my 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 IS, so I'm thinking this may a great addition to my lens family. I'm assuming that sharpness wont be to much of an issue for me as I'll be shooting with a flash 99% of the time at stops around f/7.1-13

Thanks again!

[katodog]

Shoot anything past f/8 and you'll be just fine. Seems like a lot of lenses do better stopped down, and this one does great at f/8 or narrower. The Golden Eagle shot was at f/8, and it turned out pretty dang good. Shots I've taken wide open are sometimes hit or miss. Depending on the subject and the light I can either get great images wide open or soft as hell.

One thing I always say is that it's a great range. I'm amazed at how little I use any of my other lenses when I have this out. At the zoo I use this and my Bigmos, and to be honest I only use the Bigmos when I want head shots of the animals. The only other times I go to another lens is for specific shooting, like when I need reach or when I'm shooting wide. And to be honest, I rarely switch to my 18-200mm OS, since 28mm, even on a crop body, is typically wide enough for me. I don't think it's really worth the price tag though, but if one can be found for around $1600-$1900 it's a steal. Especially if you get decent IQ out of it. I love mine, and I paid $1800 for it. I don't know how much I'd love it if I had paid $2400 for it. For that kind of price I'd expect a bit better performance.

[katodog]

Here's a few from O'Hare today.


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/_MG_1946a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/_MG_2169a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/_MG_1883a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/_MG_2193a.jpg

[katodog]

Here's a few more from today...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/_MG_2275a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/_MG_2517a.jpg



Here's a full-sized shot that I ran through Noiseware...Full Size (http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/_MG_1946b.jpg)

[katodog]

Boy, I sure hate to upload these lousy images to the archive. These really show just how bad this lens really is...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/_MG_3811a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/_MG_3845a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/_MG_3900a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/_MG_3620a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/_MG_3668a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/_MG_3701a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/_MG_3592a.jpg




Being a complete, total, utter, moron, I didn't save these with the Exif intact. I forgot to reselect "Save Exif" from something I was doing before. But, I have the originals, so if you want crops or Exif info, let me know and I'll post it.

[katodog]

Actually, don't bother asking, here's crops with Exif intact...

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/_MG_3811crop.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/_MG_3845crop.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/_MG_3900crop.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/_MG_3620crop.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/_MG_3668crop.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/_MG_3701crop.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/_MG_3592crop.jpg

[mrcoons]

What is 'bad' is that I keep looking at your great photos! Does not help my resolve to stick to my budget!!! :lol:

[katodog]

Here are two from today, unprocessed. I shoot JPG, so "unprocessed" means all that was done is in-camera, I didn't do anything except make the crops. And for the record, my 40D in-camera settings are...

Sharpness - 3
Contrast - 0
Saturation - 0
Color Tone - 0


...so not much is being done in-camera.



http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4403.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4403crop.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4406.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_4406crop.jpg



Oh, and apologies for the berry on the sparrows forehead. I didn't have enough brains to move two inches to one side.

[katodog]

More shots from.....me!! Honestly, does anybody else own this lens??



http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_6767a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_7272a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_5559a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_7071a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_7143a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_6987a.jpg

[katodog]

A few from today.



http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_8866a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_8866crop.jpg



With the lens and a full set of Kenko rings. I shot with my 2xTC and the magnification was almost identical, but the Kenko rings shots came out slightly sharper. Probably due to the glass in the TC.


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_8923a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Birds/_MG_8923crop.jpg

[Pixel Boy]

Right i put this lense up for sale no one has looked at it and now that ive seen these photos im thinking of keeping it even though i rarely use it..... damn what to do?

[katodog]

Some shots from today...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/IMG_9313a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/IMG_9235a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/IMG_9233a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Willowbrook%20Wildlife%20Center/IMG_9328a.jpg

[katodog]

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_1265a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_1175a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_1351a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_1552a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_1817a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_1534a.jpg

[chancellor]

katodog, I own and love the lens! Let me try to find a thread or two I had on this subject. The most typical responses I got were: quality not as good as..., heavy, etc. mostly from people who have never seen it :D I love this lens and it has been my good companion when I force myself to remove the 85 from the camera.

[katodog]

You need to get some shots in this thread, I feel like they should rename it the "Katodog is the only one who owns this lens" thread. It's getting lonely in here.

[morbektev]

http://photoverbeke.be/fora/f1.jpg

@100%

http://photoverbeke.be/fora/f1_100.jpg

[Fastfwd13]

You need to get some shots in this thread, I feel like they should rename it the "Katodog is the only one who owns this lens" thread. It's getting lonely in here.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who look at this thread and wonder. Should I just get just this one lens and a wide? The pictures are awesome but how does it do in low light?

[katodog]

Some low light shots...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_3606a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_9427a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/_MG_9508a.jpg

[morbektev]

I even use it for concerts! (however for the small local shows i'm very glad i have the 5d for its outstanding ISO performances ;))

210 mm, f5.6, 1/125, ISO 1000
http://photoverbeke.be/fora/hadise.jpg

150 mm, f5.6, 1/60, ISO 1600
http://photoverbeke.be/fora/sandrine.jpg

[jodelak]

@katodog, i'm starting to think you really hate this camera, you are punishing it! :) great images!

[katodog]

This lens is great for every type of subject, so I use it a lot.

As for my camera, I don't think I use my 40D that much, it's only got a shutter count of 44,742, and I've only had it since February. That's only 4500 clicks per month since I bought it. I don't know about my two 20D bodies, but I'd take a guess and say they're close or higher in shutter count. I shoot burst mode, so the image count stacks up after a while.

[katodog]

And some more shots from, hmm, let's see...ME!!


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_3493b.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_3688a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_3463a.jpg


Through glass...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_4403a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_4527a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/BrookfieldZoo/IMG_4536a.jpg

[katodog]

Recent images...


http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/IMG_8160a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/IMG_8139a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/IMG_8163a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/IMG_8225a.jpg

[katodog]

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/IMG_8385a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/IMG_8387a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/IMG_8348a.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a399/katodog/Cosley%20Zoo/IMG_8378a.jpg

[crowflyawa]

http://iqfanatic.smugmug.com/Kids-Daily/2009/Kids-Daily/IMG4079b/732932423_kzTVE-X3.jpg

http://iqfanatic.smugmug.com/Kids-Daily/2009/Kids-Daily/IMG8252/681311341_5xunX-X2.jpg

http://iqfanatic.smugmug.com/Kids-Daily/2009/Kids-Daily/IMG7476/723282663_AtgT9-XL.jpg

http://iqfanatic.smugmug.com/Kids-Daily/2009/Kids-Daily/MG4856/732944622_yuvYq-X2.jpg

http://iqfanatic.smugmug.com/Kids-Daily/2009/Kids-Daily/MG4837/732944956_BWjzS-XL.jpg

http://iqfanatic.smugmug.com/Kids-Daily/2009/Kids-Daily/IMG4109bc/732932584_uzaVT-X2.jpg

http://iqfanatic.smugmug.com/Kids-Daily/2009/Kids-Daily/MG4831/732938437_KAkW3-X3.jpg

http://iqfanatic.smugmug.com/Kids-Daily/2009/Kids-Daily/IMG7341/723278986_YM3aP-X3.jpg

[fWord]

I swear, one of these days I'm gonna buy this lens back. Previously I was forced to let it go because I wanted to upgrade my camera (1D MKI to 1Ds MKI)...and the upgrade was well worth it because I've yet to own another Canon camera since.

This lens would make perfect sense to go with a full-frame camera especially the weather-sealed variety from the 1-Series or the 5D MKII. Mate the lens with a camera of that caliber and it'd most certainly become the 'Perfect Partner', a nickname I coined for this lens but it of course never really caught on.

[newworld666]

This subject is very interesting.. and I was wondering what would be the difference if you didn't use IS and tried to get more iso (1000 ou even 1250) and a higher speed (at least 1/(2X or 3X the focal lengh)). ?
With my 70-300DO I get sharper picture than lower speed (around 1/60) with IS and 100 iso... but I use a 5DMKII wich basically maybe better on high iso ..

[fortunerox]

http://www.warrenshimquee.net/twenty/cheapet/IMG_0173%20copy.jpg


Shot this earlier this year with mine, I love that lens, but I think I'm about to sell it for some primes. I dont really use the telephoto much anymore.

[linh811]

sharpness is a compromise with most zooms. those complaining of sharpness should have nothing but primes in their kit.

[mrcoons]

Recently I was watching a video on KelbyTraining by a well known photographer, Eddie Tapp. Eddie was giving a lesson on portrait photography and his lens of choice (for these sessions anyway) was the 28-300. He thought it was the perfect portrait lens because he could get so many different focal lengths from one location. He used it in the studio and on location.

He shot it handheld and on a tripod/stand.

So this lens does have it's supporters.

[crowflyawa]

You can say the same thing about the Tamron 18-200 but that doesn’t make it a better lens than the 24-70 2.8L for different needs and users and moments.

I cant really think of a time that a 300mm focal length would be used inside a normal studio.

IF you want to spend $2400 on a "portrait lens" you would better go get the 85 1.2 instead.
You can walk around the studio like all photographers do and take any angle you want, no need to be lazy with a extra expensive lens just for fun of spending cash.
Outdoors, I do think the 28-300 has a lot more merit; the MFD alone makes it a poor all in one studio lens.
I owned one for over year as my old lens, and it was good and bad in many ways, but I was so happy when I sold it.


Recently I was watching a video on KelbyTraining by a well known photographer, Eddie Tapp. Eddie was giving a lesson on portrait photography and his lens of choice (for these sessions anyway) was the 28-300. He thought it was the perfect portrait lens because he could get so many different focal lengths from one location. He used it in the studio and on location.

He shot it handheld and on a tripod/stand.

So this lens does have it's supporters.

[Rob Douglas]

I have been on the fence about this lens and after going threw this thread completely, I'm sold! I was going to go for a 100-400 but would much rather the versatility of this lens. Then I can sell my kit 28-135 and my 70-200.

[bulayog]

Any photos of indoor events/parties/ambient light/low light/with flash?

[tewlman]

i have had my 28-300 for just over a year and love it. especially on my ff body. these were taken the weekend I bought it new years, 09. picked it up used at adorama for a really good price i think. just sent it to mack for a repair, i dropped it twice in afghanistan last year and it still took great pics but I wanted to be sure nothing got knocked out of place. I do think that is a good testament to how well they are built though, once was a pretty hard fall from a 4 wheeler and the camera/lens landed on the bottom. both times a uv filter saved my bacon...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4071/4462865004_b849a3923e_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2728/4462090079_efbf3bf0ce_b.jpg

[katodog]

I sold mine, and while I love the lenses that replaced it, I know in my mind that sooner or later I will be buying another one. The range and the IQ alone are making me kick myself repeatedly in the butt for selling it.

But, it's only a matter of time before I have another one.

[bulayog]

I sold mine, and while I love the lenses that replaced it, I know in my mind that sooner or later I will be buying another one. The range and the IQ alone are making me kick myself repeatedly in the butt for selling it.

But, it's only a matter of time before I have another one.

What lens(es) did you replace it with?

[katodog]

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8, Rokinon 85mm f/1.4, Canon 100mm f/2.8 IS L macro. My original plans were to get the Canon f/2.8 IS L, but then I decided to save a little and go non-IS. After deciding to go non-IS I figured save a bit more and go with the Sig 70-200mm f/2.8. I'm happy with it, it's a fantastic lens.

But, I miss that "one lens for everything" ease that I had with the 28-300mm L. My thing these days is trying to have at least one or two faster lenses though, for low-light shooting and other thigns, so the 28-300mm L had to go to fund other lenses.


I'm about 99.9% sure it won't be too long before I grab another one though.

[fWord]

Well, the day I go for a safari, I'd be having the 28-300L on a FF and a 100-400L on a cropper, plus maybe a wide angle and backup standard zoom in the bag. Even with a weight limit this combination will be very functional and reduce the risk of dust getting into the camera from lens changes. The debate however, would be whether the pump action of the zoom will eventually get dust on the sensor anyway.

[Rob Douglas]

Katodog,

I wound up getting then Sigma 50-500. I missed out on 2 really great deals on the 28-300 by minutes. Sill looking though for that great deal to come along. I did get a remarkably sharp copy of the 50-500 that pretty much hasn't come off my 50D since I picked it up. Probably going to let my Canon 200mmf/4L & 28-135mm IS USM go since the 50-500 covers them both quite well. Thanks for all your advise. It fits mounted in the quick draw compartment of my Kata 3n1 30 to boot ;)

[katodog]

You're welcome. Just wait until you see the 50-500mm OS, you'll start kicking yourself all over again.

KEH always has one or two of the 28-300mm IS L, so I'm hoping when money frees itself up I can just poke my head on their site and grab one.

[Rob Douglas]

Might have to dump the 50-500 and the 70-200 for one ;)

[katodog]

Yup, I'm still debating in my head if I want to get rid of my 150-500mm OS and go for the 50-500mm OS. I have some lenses I can get rid of to fund it, but am waiting to see if anyone else gets one and how the IQ is before I decide for sure.

[Rob Douglas]

If the IQ on the OS is equal or better I'll be selling the non-OS 50-500 / 70-200 f/4L / 28-135 IS USM for the OS version since it will cover them all ;)

[fWord]

Sorry I seem to be out of the loop here. But does this Sigma 50-500 OS that everyone's talking about actually exist and gone on sale? It'd be a nice one to have for a safari, but I on an old camera, I'm not sure if Sigma's OS systems actually work.

[OlegKalyan]

28-300 vibration problem, edited to a different thread, thank you.

[siyarki2]

night concert shot probably at 300mm wide open 1600asa 30D

http://images.siyarki2.multiply.com/image/5/photos/39/1200x1200/59/MG-2246.JPG?et=u39UJizz25ZJ2yBwfK5a3w&nmid=85115736

http://images.siyarki2.multiply.com/image/5/photos/39/1200x1200/66/MG-2293.JPG?et=gS17CKmgPiAtxl%2BGwoZGsw&nmid=85115736

http://images.siyarki2.multiply.com/image/5/photos/39/1200x1200/53/MG-2215.JPG?et=RTV5ApTcIqrzUaPz%2BuaFPg&nmid=85115736

http://images.siyarki2.multiply.com/image/6/photos/38/1200x1200/2/MG-1438.jpg?et=iBcN1qEaddv3oJoncscjIg&nmid=62794983

[siyarki2]

tennis event indoor again 1600asa 300mm wide open 30d

http://images.siyarki2.multiply.com/image/14/photos/50/1200x1200/42/MG-0331.jpg?et=N43Hne1Jd%2C1BaJwQ9th0zg&nmid=132907526

http://images.siyarki2.multiply.com/image/3/photos/50/1200x1200/84/MG-9683.jpg?et=CNhiup6R%2CaPHy14FqWG6dw&nmid=132907526

http://images.siyarki2.multiply.com/image/3/photos/50/1200x1200/24/MG-0101.jpg?et=XZgq2LH%2CSFJuegAjczu9Rw&nmid=132907526

[x_tan]

My 1st post for this forums :)

I has this lens since 2008; intended to use with EOS 400D. But past 2 years, it's with my 5DMK2 all time.

I'm a seasonal traveler. I pack light & travel light. I need an all-in-one lens and this one is doing beautifully for me.

This lens is 'soft' compare my 70-200mm f/4; not as 'wide' as my 17-40mm f/4L; not as 'fast or light' as my 24-105mm f/4L.

I don't like change lens outside my house as I got few dirt with my 400D many time before; cleaning the sensor is pain during traveling. So, I got this lens and it is my best travel companion.

I start to post some of my travel photos from this lens, and I would like to hear from you, please :-)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4089/5019897350_cd8fdaa0e6_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019897350/)
Kauppatori, Helsinki, Finland (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019897350/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/9, 1/200s, 35mm, 5DM2

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4084/5019898692_5dce58b14c_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019898692/)
Kauppatori, Helsinki, Finland (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019898692/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/8, 1/125s, 28mm, 5DM2

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4107/5019903090_a7a44ec1ea_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019903090/)
Leaving Helsinki Port (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019903090/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/8, 1/200s, 65mm, 5DM2

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4107/5019904738_f7f52ffe85_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019904738/)
Ferry from Tallinn to Helsinki (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019904738/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/6.4, 1/250s, 250mm, 5DM2

[x_tan]

Just few more photos from Tallinn, Estonia

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4086/5020306456_fde73873b3_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5020306456/)
Tallinn City Squares Bar (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5020306456/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/5.6, 1/200s, Focal Length 170 mm, 5DM2

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4083/5019697495_76245a8883_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019697495/)
Tallinn Street (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019697495/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/5.6, 1/200s, Focal Length 250 mm, 5DM2

[x_tan]

Two more photos from Melbourne city this morning.

I got up about 4:30am and drove to the city. Not many people around the CBD and I had all the river by my self :lol:

No editing :-) (just re-size for upload) :cool:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4154/5022986742_2202a8de9d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5022986742/)
Melbourne (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5022986742/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/4.0, 1.6s, Focal Length 40mm

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5022986736_6b56456ff0_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5022986736/)
Melbourne (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5022986736/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/4.0, 2s, Focal Length 50mm

[bulayog]

Very nice shots, X_Tan!

[x_tan]

Very nice shots, X_Tan!

Thanks bulayog :)

Just take some close-up photo with my 400D in 300mm (= 480mm in APS-C DSLR) and I think this lens is doing reasonable well.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4108/5025247901_29a970d014_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5025247901/)
Test Photo (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5025247901/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO 100, f/8.0, 1/500, 300mm (=480mm)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4154/5025248065_69cc1a928d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5025248065/)
Test Photo (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5025248065/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO 100, f/10, 1/400, 300mm (=480mm)

This is 100% crop from above photo:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5025248159_85e0598858_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5025248159/)
Test Photo, 1024 Crop (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5025248159/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr

All photos were taken as jpg files and just re-size for upload.

Have a nice day ;)

[x_tan]

And close-up photos with 5D M2

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4110/5025294909_0c31b3a64a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5025294909/)
Test Photo (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5025294909/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO 320, f/8.0, 1/160s, Focal Length 300mm

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4103/5025911240_2c9afd477d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5025911240/)
Test Photo (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5025911240/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO 320, f/8.0, 1/125s, Focal Length 300mm

[x_tan]

Two more from this morning :p

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4104/5042562501_400ae49ac2_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5042562501/)
Melbourne (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5042562501/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO50, f/5.6, 13s, Focal Length 150mm

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4113/5043185952_c5d098fafc_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5043185952/)
Melbourne (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5043185952/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO50, f/3.5, 4s, Focal Length 35mm

:cool:

[x_tan]

Just some photos taken with 400D in 300mm (=480mm)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4112/5061985184_cf64f8b92c_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5061985184/)
Melbourne Zoo 006 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5061985184/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
1/320s, f/6.3, ISO 400, Focal Length 300mm

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4108/5061375577_0884e9580b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5061375577/)
Melbourne Zoo 005 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5061375577/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
1/640s, f/9.0, ISO 400, Focal Length 275mm

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4107/5061984872_9575bf36dc_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5061984872/)
Melbourne Zoo 004 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5061984872/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
1/160s, f/5.6, ISO 400, Focal Length 300mm

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4091/5061984742_c616a04d77_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5061984742/)
Melbourne Zoo 003 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5061984742/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
1/400s, f/7.1, ISO 400, Focal Length 300mm

:p

[x_tan]

Ok, I'm running one man show here once again.

This lens is the most dynamic L lens Canon provide. So, it will come with me with my next holiday trip once again :lol:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4025/5074946340_1e88d18094_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5074946340/)
Amsterdam 020 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5074946340/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
1/80s, f/5.0, Focal Length 80mm, ISO 2500, 5D2

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4036/5074946512_87fb6493a9_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5074946512/)
Amsterdam 021 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5074946512/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
1/40s, f/4.0, Focal Length 40mm, ISO 125, 5D2

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4053/5074946864_d4b1d64c7e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5074946864/)
Amsterdam 023 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5074946864/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
1/250s, f/5.6, Focal Length 300mm, ISO 320, 5D2

Have fun :cool:

[gkarris]

Just few more photos from Tallinn, Estonia

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4086/5020306456_fde73873b3_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5020306456/)
Tallinn City Squares Bar (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5020306456/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/5.6, 1/200s, Focal Length 170 mm, 5DM2


Aaaaaah, the American Dollar - it's everywhere you want to be... ;)

Two more photos from Melbourne city this morning.

I got up about 4:30am and drove to the city. Not many people around the CBD and I had all the river by my self :lol:

No editing :-) (just re-size for upload) :cool:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4154/5022986742_2202a8de9d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5022986742/)
Melbourne (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5022986742/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/4.0, 1.6s, Focal Length 40mm

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5022986736_6b56456ff0_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5022986736/)
Melbourne (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5022986736/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/4.0, 2s, Focal Length 50mm

I love Cityscapes - these are absolutely gorgeous.

I'm starting to hate changing lenses - wish I can afford these long zooms, especially this L one.

[x_tan]

Aaaaaah, the American Dollar - it's everywhere you want to be... ;)
I love Cityscapes - these are absolutely gorgeous.
I'm starting to hate changing lenses - wish I can afford these long zooms, especially this L one.

Thanks gkarris

I got my one from the State: in Australia, it will cost me A$3600! (about US$1000 more!!)

[Grady69]

I would love to have this lens, but cant do it right now!:(

[x_tan]

Just some photos taken from Magic Fountain Of Montjuïc, Barcelona, Spain. All photos were taken with 5D2 in hand held. All the fountain show were taken in ISO 6400. Hope you like them, thanks ;)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4087/5096516354_ddae96b58e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5096516354/)
Magic Fountain Of Montjuïc 002 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5096516354/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4148/5095929569_a07867a06a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5095929569/)
Magic Fountain Of Montjuïc 054 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5095929569/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/5096526082_d0e41fb9b5_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5096526082/)
Magic Fountain Of Montjuïc 055 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5096526082/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/5095922383_64ba7c7f90_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5095922383/)
Magic Fountain Of Montjuïc 015 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5095922383/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/5096533792_cc45b2de77_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5096533792/)
Magic Fountain Of Montjuïc 096 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5096533792/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/5095931479_818f34c7a5_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5095931479/)
Magic Fountain Of Montjuïc 064 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5095931479/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr

The whole set HERE (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/sets/72157625072115815/detail/)

[jetpilotsimmo]

My 1st post for this forums :)

I has this lens since 2008; intended to use with EOS 400D. But past 2 years, it's with my 5DMK2 all time.

I'm a seasonal traveler. I pack light & travel light. I need an all-in-one lens and this one is doing beautifully for me.

This lens is 'soft' compare my 70-200mm f/4; not as 'wide' as my 17-40mm f/4L; not as 'fast or light' as my 24-105mm f/4L.

I don't like change lens outside my house as I got few dirt with my 400D many time before; cleaning the sensor is pain during traveling. So, I got this lens and it is my best travel companion.

I start to post some of my travel photos from this lens, and I would like to hear from you, please :-)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4089/5019897350_cd8fdaa0e6_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019897350/)
Kauppatori, Helsinki, Finland (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019897350/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/9, 1/200s, 35mm, 5DM2

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4084/5019898692_5dce58b14c_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019898692/)
Kauppatori, Helsinki, Finland (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019898692/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/8, 1/125s, 28mm, 5DM2

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4107/5019903090_a7a44ec1ea_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019903090/)
Leaving Helsinki Port (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019903090/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/8, 1/200s, 65mm, 5DM2

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4107/5019904738_f7f52ffe85_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019904738/)
Ferry from Tallinn to Helsinki (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5019904738/) by X_Tan (http://www.flickr.com/people/x_tan/), on Flickr
ISO100, f/6.4, 1/250s, 250mm, 5DM2

Fantastic shots, and welcome, I spend a lot of time in Tallinn! Great to see some good pics!

[x_tan]

Thanks jetpilotsimmo :-)
Tallinn is one most beautiful place I will go back again!

[MDJAK]

while a number of the crops here are soft, some are very good and for the range of this zoom, it looks real good to me.

I was reading the reviews on B&H. I cannot believe almost every person puts CONS: WEIGHT.

Do they expect it to weigh five ounces? :oops:

me

[Grady69]

I would love to own this lens! But cant afford too:(

[Grady69]

Gee I have said that before! lol

[x_tan]

while a number of the crops here are soft, some are very good and for the range of this zoom, it looks real good to me.
I was reading the reviews on B&H. I cannot believe almost every person puts CONS: WEIGHT.
Do they expect it to weigh five ounces? :oops:
me

Add a 5D2, together 2480g = 5.46 pound. I call it WMD (Weight of Muscle Destruction). So, after 2-3 weeks overseas holiday, I usual had a sore upper back for a month :cry:

From photozone.de review about this lens (http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/426-canon_28300_3556is_5d), it says 'if you need a high resolution across the frame you need to stop down to f/8, better f/11 here'. (http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/426-canon_28300_3556is_5d?start=2)

Just look back my own photos, the nice one was token over f/8 at most.

So, this is a VERY SLOW lens but work well under good lighting condition; it will be struggling in poor lighting such as in concert.

But under the poor lighting condition, even the new crowned King 70-200mm f/2.8 IS Mark II struggling sometime. You can see the example Here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=10995671&postcount=1256) or Here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=10995872&postcount=1258). Shocking, is it?

Like any stage of our life, we all have different need. If you ask me, would I buy this lens again today or not? The answer is not: I just have my 1st ever prime last month - the prime take wonderful picture even in the raining day; and the colour just incredible! And I haven't used any zoom at home at all for a month now.

I'm MOVING to prime now; but this lens is not for sale ;)

[x_tan]

Just some practice photos from yesterday ;) Thanks you :)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4007/5152172673_bcdf00a0b6_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5152172673/)
5D2, ISO 3200, f/10, 1/125s, Focal Length 300mm

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1245/5152783106_a378bd8e1e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5152783106/)
5D2, ISO 640, f/11, 1/250s, Focal Length 300mm

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4060/5152173607_d47b34c285_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5152173607/)
5D2, ISO 1600, f/11, 1/330s, Focal Length 300mm

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4027/5152784008_dd93b3706e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5152784008/)
5D2, ISO 100, f/11, 1/200s, Focal Length 300mm

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4059/5152174251_8e6be3fd0d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5152174251/)
5D2, ISO 2500, f/6.4, 1/320s, Focal Length 300mm

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1177/5152784572_c89694a90b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5152784572/)
5D2, ISO 100, f/11, 1/500s, Focal Length 300mm

[x_tan]

Ok, one from today practice photo

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4087/5192076692_c46286ff23_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5192076692/)
5D2, ISO400, 1/125s, f/11 @ 300mm
Sharp as 100mm & 135mm Prime!

[x_tan]

Hello, anyone here ? :lol:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5207/5265108187_3b78f7ffee_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5265108187/)

Taken with Canon EOS T2i; Full sets of Canon & Kenko Extension Tubes.

[newworld666]

:lol: ... I am still looking and enjoying ...

I was wondering whether it could be an alternative to my actual favourite travel combo.
5DMKII 24L+85L+Zuiko500/8

... unfortunately, I really think I would miss fast or even ultra fast speed (F1.2 to F2.8). Actually, I love night shots, but @6400 ther is too much noise and sharpness loss.
Could you post a 16/9 FullHD size of your night shots in Barcelona :confused: ?

A least continue to post samples, it's really interesting !

[x_tan]

Could you post a 16/9 FullHD size of your night shots in Barcelona :confused: ?

Ok, Barcelona unedited Edition :-) All original. All photo handhold only.
As I shoot all my photos in JPEG (till last week :-( ), so no RAW files, sorry.
Just click on the photos, and get the original photos :-)

5D2; ISO 3200; 1/30s; f/5.6; Program AE; Focal Length 170 mm
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5046/5265417315_8ba08d8672_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5265417315/)

5D2; ISO 3200; 1/30s; f/5.6; Program AE; Focal Length 110 mm
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5048/5266025496_8bb19d4478_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5266025496/)

5D2; ISO 6400; 1/40s; f/4.0; Program AE; Focal Length 50 mm
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5047/5265420219_475a020075_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5265420219/)

5D2; ISO 6400; 1/40s; f/4.5; Program AE; Focal Length 40 mm
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5084/5265421917_b9291e6ed5_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/x_tan/5265421917/)