Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Equipment Talk' section > Canon EF and EF-S Lenses > Lens Sample Photo Archive
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 30th of December 2006 (Sat)   #1
fWord
Goldmember
 
fWord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,637
Default Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 L IS USM

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/...d.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.



This dragonfly is pretty small:





A waterfall at 1/8s:



Barrels of cactus at 300mm:



A toad at 300mm:



And the obligatory duck shot:

__________________
LightWorks Portfolio
Night Photography Tutorial: Basics & Minutiae
Gear List (Past & Present)
The Art of Composition IS the Art of Photography.
fWord is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 12th of September 2007 (Wed)   #2
G35Driver
Senior Member
 
G35Driver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Fernley, NV USA
Posts: 1,420
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

are you the only one with this lens? is this lens that bad or is it that its just too expensive?
__________________
ll 40D ll XTI ll 17-40mm f/4L ll 300mm f/4L IS ll 50mm f1.4 ll 420EX ll
G35Driver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of September 2007 (Wed)   #3
asylumxl
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stuck in an invisible box
Posts: 2,306
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

Too expensive. It's a good lens, but people avoid superzooms, even if it is a good one.
__________________
.................................................. ..
I M A G E I N A T I O N
..........WEBSITE
.................................................. ..
Pixel peeping is like count the sides of a circle, pointless.
asylumxl is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 12th of September 2007 (Wed)   #4
kahren
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: CT
Posts: 478
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

those pics look great
__________________

kahren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of September 2007 (Wed)   #5
rajastan5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

I love the waterfall pic. What kind of PP did you use on that one?
rajastan5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of September 2007 (Wed)   #6
NickSimcheck
Sir Chimp-a-lot
 
NickSimcheck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE, Michigan
Posts: 3,601
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

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?
__________________
NickSimcheck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th of September 2007 (Fri)   #7
fWord
Goldmember
 
fWord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,637
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

Quote:
Originally Posted by G35Driver View Post
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.
__________________
LightWorks Portfolio
Night Photography Tutorial: Basics & Minutiae
Gear List (Past & Present)
The Art of Composition IS the Art of Photography.
fWord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th of September 2007 (Fri)   #8
fWord
Goldmember
 
fWord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,637
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

Quote:
Originally Posted by kahren View Post
those pics look great
Thank you for the kind comment. These are just test pics...quite horribly done on top of that.
__________________
LightWorks Portfolio
Night Photography Tutorial: Basics & Minutiae
Gear List (Past & Present)
The Art of Composition IS the Art of Photography.
fWord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th of September 2007 (Fri)   #9
fWord
Goldmember
 
fWord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,637
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

Quote:
Originally Posted by rajastan5 View Post
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.
__________________
LightWorks Portfolio
Night Photography Tutorial: Basics & Minutiae
Gear List (Past & Present)
The Art of Composition IS the Art of Photography.
fWord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th of September 2007 (Fri)   #10
fWord
Goldmember
 
fWord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,637
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickSimcheck View Post
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.
__________________
LightWorks Portfolio
Night Photography Tutorial: Basics & Minutiae
Gear List (Past & Present)
The Art of Composition IS the Art of Photography.
fWord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th of October 2007 (Sat)   #11
Lightstream
Yoda
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cult of the Full Frame
Posts: 14,915
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

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..
Lightstream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd of November 2007 (Sat)   #12
MaDProFF
Goldmember
 
MaDProFF's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East Sussex, UK
Posts: 4,366
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

Would you say that the IQ is as good at 300mm as a 100-400 at 400mm??
__________________
Photographic Images on Brett Butler px500 & Flickr
Some Canon Bodies , few blackish lenses, A dam heavy black one, couple dirty white ones, a 3 legged walking stick, a mono walking stick, and a bag full of rubbish
And Still Learning all walks of life, & most of all Photography.
MaDProFF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd of November 2007 (Sat)   #13
woollyback
Member
 
woollyback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 760
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

MaDProFF,

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

Rob
woollyback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd of November 2007 (Sat)   #14
MaDProFF
Goldmember
 
MaDProFF's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East Sussex, UK
Posts: 4,366
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

Quote:
Originally Posted by woollyback View Post
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
__________________
Photographic Images on Brett Butler px500 & Flickr
Some Canon Bodies , few blackish lenses, A dam heavy black one, couple dirty white ones, a 3 legged walking stick, a mono walking stick, and a bag full of rubbish
And Still Learning all walks of life, & most of all Photography.
MaDProFF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd of November 2007 (Sat)   #15
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
 
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Providence RI
Posts: 40,268
Default Re: -=Archive (hope it survives) 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS Images

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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Used Canon 70-200 F4L USM non-IS vs Canon Refurb 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM mike93lx Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 4 25th of January 2008 (Fri) 22:52
Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG Macro v Canon 75-300mm F4.0-5.6 III EF USM JamesU2002 Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 7 11th of September 2007 (Tue) 01:50
Canon 70-300mm IS USM v's Sigma 70-300mm tuppy Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 2 1st of August 2007 (Wed) 00:03
EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM or Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM ? sorashell Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 5 13th of March 2006 (Mon) 14:52
Sigma 300mm f2.8 EX APO HSM or Canon EF 300mm f2.8L IS USM? garethhhhh Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 13 23rd of April 2004 (Fri) 22:57


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:17.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.