Sorry - another lens question - looking for an upgrade

[hank1105]

I purchased the 300D about a month ago. So far I have been amazed at the pics I have been able to capture. I only have the kit lense (18mm-15mm). However, my biggest issue is that I would like to be able to get closer pics then what I am getting now. The 55mm just does not cut it. I would like to spend around 400 bucks, tops. Would the Canon 28-135 be the approriate next step, or something else. eBay seems to have a few around this price, which is fine by me. Any info would be appreciated.

Hank

[roanjohn]

The 28-125 would be an excellent upgrade if you're happy with the kit.

Also, for a few more bling, you can purchase the 70-200 f4 L. This lens, coupled with the kit lens should give you a reach from 18-200.

Ro1

[Olegis]

I second the 70-200 f/4, this is one of the best Canon zooms ever made. It costs about $550-$580 - but it worth every penny.
If you're happy with the results of the kit lens, the 70-200 f/4 will blow you away with everything - much faster and quieter AF (USM), much better build and incredible sharpness of the pictures.

[timmyquest]

More of the same

If you think your kit lens takes great pictures, wait till you slap that L on there.

The 70-200 f/4 really is a steal if ya dont need a faster lens, and most really dont need it.

[hank1105]

Wow, looks impressive, as you stated a little more bling, but it seems well worth it. I saw two on eBay, right around 500 bucks now, could definitely increase in the future. Looks like I will have to sell some stuff on eBay to afford this. That is the great thing about eBay, which some of you might already know. Thanks again for the info.

Hank

[hank1105]

Quick question - what is the deal with the "IS" version of this lens? It seems to add huge cost to the lens as compared to the "L" version. Thanks.

Hank

[Jon]

IS is Image Stabilization - gyros inside the lens shift elements around to damp out camera vibration so you can hand-hold at slower speeds. But the IS version is also f/2.8, not f/4.

[hank1105]

Jon - thanks for the info, that would explain the increase in price as compared to the "L" model. That is cool that the lens actually contains gyroscopes, wild stuff. I did also see that it was 2.8 - I am assuming that is the max apperature (sp?) that the lens can perform? Thanks again.

Hank

[timmyquest]

Jon - thanks for the info, that would explain the increase in price as compared to the "L" model. That is cool that the lens actually contains gyroscopes, wild stuff. I did also see that it was 2.8 - I am assuming that is the max apperature (sp?) that the lens can perform? Thanks again.

Hank

Sure is, and although it is out of your price range there is also a 70-200 f/2.8 NON IS that falls inbetween the two at around $1000

[Jon]

Right. Canon makes three 70-200 L lenses, the f/4, the f/2.8 non-IS, and the f/2.8 IS. Differences are the aperature and the IS, plus they all have different numbers of lens elements (which is a design thing, and only matters to you because more elements = more weight).

[hank1105]

Awesome, thanks for educating a noob. Looks like I will be in the market for a 70-200 f/4 L lense :lol:

[Olegis]

You won't be sorry.
One more word of advice - go with reputable sellers like B&H or Adorama. Do not buy such an expensive piece of equipment from Ebay - sometimes you can get pretty good deals over there, but it's also very easy to come across some kind of fraud, or bad merchandise. The prices of used L lenses are not much lower than those of new ones, so buying new lens is probably better idea (unless you can check and test the lens before you actually pay for it - I did this with my 70-200 f/2.8L).

[hank1105]

Really, I have always had good experiences with eBay, usually verify the sellers feedback prior to purchase. However, I do appreciate your advice concerning purchasing lens off of eBay. I did get my 300d off of eBay and I couldn't be happier. Thanks for the advice.

Hank