Flat 50mm vs 28-200 zoom?

[mikeyg]

Hello.

Would like some input and thoughts please.

I'm shooting a kids cosmetic kit for a print ad with a Canon Digital Rebel. I've tried 2 different lenses in 2 different camera modes.

First I used a quantaray 28-200 set at 50mm in the "P" mode and then in "AV" mode with the aperature at 22.

I then used a Canon flat 50mm and did 2 sots in the exact same camera positions and modes.

The canon lens gave me markedly better results as far as overall sharpness and depth of field goes.

I really like the diversity of the 28-200 but am not satisified with the quality. Should I try the Canon 28-200? Is there really that much difference in lens mfgrs with regards to sharpess and depth of field?

Thanks for ANY input!

Mike

[tim]

The general rule is the larger the zoom, the worse the image quality will be. Primes (like your 50mm) are the best image quality around. I use a Tamron 28-75, which has an excellent reputation and is quite sharp, haven't compared it with my 50mm, but both do very well. I'd suggest this lens or one in this thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=56752) for important shooting. A 28-200 might be ok for casual holiday photos, but personally I wouldn't buy one.

[brad.swanson]

The Quantaray line is a private label brand, marketed by Ritz/Wolfe camera. I doubt that you could ever expect to receive "pro" quality images from it. However, that doesn't mean you can't take good shots using that (or any) lens. You just have to find its' sweet spot. Every lens has a sweet spot. Some lenses have a larger sweet spot than others.

Lenses are a compromise. Lack of distortion, sharpness, good color, autofocus, zoom capability, weight, aperture, and price. All of these are qualities that you'd like to control when building a lens. The more flaws in a lens, the lower the price.
There are very few exceptions. When you find an exception, it's usually going to be a VERY popular lens.

A zoom lens that covers a lot of range, has an f4-5.6 f-stop, and does not focus terribly fast usually is going to have some drawbacks. In your case, that 28-200 will probably be best at f8/f11. It will probably have some chromatic aberration or it won't be very sharp at other f-stops, and at various zoom levels, might be better, or worse.

Switch to a Sigma 70-200 f2.8, or the Canon 70-200 f2.8, and you're likely to spot very few problems. But you'll pay a lot more, and the lens will weight considerably more. But you'll have a lens that is "pro" caliber.

You don't need to spend a lot of money to get "pro" caliber shots. If you forego the convenience of a zoom, you can often get much better lenses for less money. A Canon 50mm f1.8 for $80 is probably the best bang for the buck in the Canon lineup. The 50mm f1.4 is a better performing lens for $300. Give up the zoom, gain a lot of quality in other areas.

If you can, try to look at lens reviews. Do NOT look at sample shots. You want to see test shots from all different f-stops, and all different focal lengths. When you see image degradation at different f-stops, you know you're not getting a fantastic lens. But that's for you to decide. Every lens is good at something. Your job is to find one that works for you at the price you want to pay.

Good luck.

[ron chappel]

I can answer the canon 28-200 question as i owned one recently. It will be a little better than the quanteray in some areas but no more.
As the others have allready said,it's near impossible to make such a wide zoom range in one lens that competes with non zooms
The only hyperzoom that gives genuinely good image quality is the canon 28-300 L IS ,but it costs a fortune.
The good news is that if you don't mind having two zoom lenses instead of one,you CAN have very good image quality without a huge cost.
Some suggestions are:

Budget but pretty good- canon 28-105 (3.5-4.5 version) + canon 100-300 usm

Very good- Tamron 28-75 XR + Canon 70-200/4 L

Awsome-Canon 24-70/2.8L + canon 70-200/2.8 L

[mikeyg]

You guys are awesome....EXCELLENT advice.

Thanks so much!

Mike