Advise on which lens to buy ?

[MICHAEL B]

Hi there !
I´m also having problems choosing the proper lenses for my purposes...
Have a CANON 20D with the kit lens 18-55mm
Have also an older EF 35-105mm/ 3.5-4.5 which I got when I used my analog EOS 600 camera..

Thinking or choosing between buying either a
Canon EF 75-300/4-5,6 III USM
Canon EF 75-300/4-5,6 IS USM
or a used CANON EF 35-350mm/3.5-5.6 L USM....
Of course this L-lens is an expensiver lens... But I could get it for $1200

But is it still worth the extra money...?

Mostly taking pictures of nature/objects during daytime outdoors..
Also I take a lot of pictures of actionsports ( skiing/snowboarding/WRC-events)
But also I`m taking a lot of pictures of my kids while playing etc...

Any suggestions ?
Michael

[Andy_T]

Michael,

I've never used the 35-350, so my opinion is only based on reviews and user comments I've read about it.

Its main advantage is the very long zoom range (10x) together with average optical performance.

As a rule, hyperzooms with such a long zoom range really suck as far as image quality is concerned, because it is very difficult to construct such a lens that gives sharp images at all focal lengths.

If you look at other Canon L lenses like the 24-70/2.8L or the 70-200/4.0L, these have absolutely stellar image quality ... but you need two lenses to cover a long zoom range.

A hyperzoom that is capable of giving 'average' (i.e.: usable) results is a prized possession for people who have very strong reasons for only wanting to use just one lens ... e.g. press journalists. I doubt that the 35-350 will give you better optical performance than your 35-105 together with one of the 75-300 lenses ... but it will be much more expensive and a lot heavier.

As you have the range from 35-105 already covered, the 100-400 will most likely give you a lot better results for sports ... if you don't mind having to swap lenses.

Best regards,
Andy

[Cadwell]

Sigma APO 100-300mm f/4.0 EX. Much better than the Canon 300mm zooms.