Why doesnt anyone talk about the 28-300

[timmyquest]

Wow...

I always shrugged this lens off because of it's HUGE zoom range, but damn...go look up some of the images on pbase

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_28-300_35-56_l_is_usm

It's damn impressive...and talk about a nice walk around lens, this thing does it all :shock:

[poke]

If I'm thinking of the same one... it has the push pull action, which I didn't like. It was about $1000 more than the 70-200 when I looked. It also was f3.5-5.6 I think, and I was after a fast lense.

All said and done, I love the 70-200mm f2.8L IS. If they were to come out with an f2.8 version of the 28 - 300, I would definately jump at it.

[tim]

They do (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=64347) ;)

[CyberDyneSystems]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=31610&highlight=28-300
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=56399&highlight=28-300
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=64347&highlight=28-300
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=50417&highlight=28-300mm
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=36459&highlight=28-300mm

[SDK^]

It's a good quality lens but who needs 28mm and 300mm on the same shoot ?!?!
Most if not all of those photos in the first post look like they are the telephoto end. In which case a 300mm F4 would have been a better choice :)

[Jon]

It's a good quality lens but who needs 28mm and 300mm on the same shoot ?!?!

Photojournalists, travelers/tourists who need to keep their luggage down, people shooting in adverse conditions (don't want to expose the internals to dust/moisture/salt spray while changing lenses), people in search of a good walk-around lens, shall I continue?

[poke]

Photojournalists, travelers/tourists who need to keep their luggage down, people shooting in adverse conditions (don't want to expose the internals to dust/moisture/salt spray while changing lenses), people in search of a good walk-around lens, shall I continue?

I definately considered buying it for a walkaround lense. But in the end, the lure of the faster f2.8 won me over. :D

[Tom W]

Its a biggun for wandering around. But its a great, durable tool for the photographer who has to respond to fast-changing environments. It loses a notch or two to the finer zooms like the 24-70 or 70-200, but it serves its purpose very well.

I've looked at it with some desire, but decided to save my cash for now, as I don't find myself in situations where I need it.

[DionM]

I too would not mind one, but I can't help but think that a 17mm prime, 70-200 f4 and a 1.4x extender would be perhaps a better kit. Albeit more lens changing, but still lightweight.

[Andy_T]

Might have something to do with the price, as well :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

[HKFEVER]

Wow...

I always shrugged this lens off because of it's HUGE zoom range, but damn...go look up some of the images on pbase

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_28-300_35-56_l_is_usm

It's damn impressive...and talk about a nice walk around lens, this thing does it all :shock:

From the above http, it is not that sharp and at 28mm it has some flare at the upper right corner.

[the7ferret]

its a photojournalist lens.
Allows quick access to a large focal length which good sharpness. However its not the best for anything else cause it dosent let in enough light.

[timmyquest]

From the above http, it is not that sharp and at 28mm it has some flare at the upper right corner.


:rolleyes:

I gave you a link to 550 photos and you seem to be commenting on one :confused:

http://www.pbase.com/image/34383964
http://www.pbase.com/image/34419742

Looks sharp to me.

[HKFEVER]

Any shoots with 300mm length wide open.

[MariaLanevski]

I was very happy with 28-300 at the beginning, though a little too dark, but now it's gone out of focus. I can't get the focus right, all pics are out of focus. Could it be because of the lense weight?

[HKFEVER]

I was very happy with 28-300 at the beginning, though a little too dark, but now it's gone out of focus. I can't get the focus right, all pics are out of focus. Could it be because of the lense weight?

Most likely, you are not use to it and too slow shutter speed.

[johnmac]

I have the 35-350, the predecessor of the 28-300. It is an excellent lens and the negative comments about it usually come from people who have never used one. I have taken thousands of images with my 35-350, had front covers @ A4, posters, calendars, postcards and all the rest printed from it. It has worked in arctic conditions, in pouring rain, tropical rainforest and deserts, hot cold humid and dry. It does not suck in dust as some would have you believe - ten years of considerable use and mine is still clean inside, and works as well as it did when I bought it. It has earned its purchase price ten times over. My agents are happy with its images, and numerous photog I have loaned it to during workshops I have led have been delighted with the verstility and quality. Is it as sharp as a 300 f2.8? No. Or a 28 f2.8? No. But when I have been eg on a whale boat with stuff happening around me and other photogs are wrestling with their bags to swap their wides for teles or vice-versa, AND trying to keep spray and muck out of their camera bodies, I just smile and keep shooting, wipe the muck of the front, and look forward to seeing the images in print. Until you try it dont knock it! Too many folks obsess over LPM and DXO and MTF and all the rest of it. At the end of the day it comes down to getting the picture in your camera, You can have the sharpest lens in the world, but if it aint on your camera its a paperweight.

I may buy the 28-300 soon, as it is supposed to be an improvement over the old lens. We'll see.

[raylks]

If I am rich then I will buy it.

If Canon produces a 18-300mm or 28-300mm and with a f2.8, then I would definitely buy it.

[Belmondo]

Had one. Sold it.

I thought the 100-400 was sharper and more useful for the kind of shooting I did. I think this is a very popular lens with photojournalists due to the extreme 10X zoom range. I also don't feel it's terribly sharp at all focal lengths, but more than adequate for that kind of work.

[Tom W]

If I am rich then I will buy it.

If Canon produces a 18-300mm or 28-300mm and with a f2.8, then I would definitely buy it.

If Canon ever makes that lens in f/2.8, it had better come with wheels! It will be huge.

Frankly, I'd like to see a 28-300 f/3.5-5.6 IS DO lens, about the size of the 70-300 DO. That would be very versatile in those situations where large lenses are forbidden.