Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 03 Jan 2012 (Tuesday) 07:39
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

28 300mm or 70 200mm

 
Tragic_Golfer
Senior Member
400 posts
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Mar 18, 2012 04:21 |  #16

andbott723 wrote in post #13638463 (external link)
I'm interested in buying a new long range lens for sports, wildlife, outdoor use. I'm interested in the 28 300 and the 70 200 2.8 is ii. Any ideas on these lenses?

I am interested to know if you have a crop sensor or FF body?


Canon 5D mkII - BG-E6 Grip, Canon 40D Gripped, Sigma 17-50 f2.8, Sigma 24-70 f2.8, Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS, Canon EF-S 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 IS, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II, Canon 550EX, Canon 430EXII.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
x_tan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,147 posts
Gallery: 137 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 462
Joined Sep 2010
Location: ɐılɐɹʇsnɐ 'ǝuɹnoqlǝɯ
     
Mar 18, 2012 05:34 |  #17

hugues wrote in post #14105938 (external link)
I am going through a similar debate, although my shortlist is more the 28-300 L vs 70-300 L. I do need the 300 end as this is for a safari trip and I want to minimise the kit I carry and the need to change lenses out there in the open. And I want the wildlife as well as the landscape lengths. Hence my dithering. If it were not for this last point I would go for the newer and lighter 70-300L.
Do any 28-300 L owners plan to switch to the 'newer' technology on the 70-300 L?
Other advice? Thanks

I used to own 70-200 f/4L (No IS); which was only L lens I got rip off - slow lens, only x3 zoom - not enough reach ether. So I'm not considering 70-200 f/2.8 IS II either, as it's just not dynamic enough for me.

I almost got 100-400L few months back - but turn out it was gray market from HK; so I returned it.

Never use 70-300L, can't say anything.

28-300L is slow lens; as long as you use it properly, it can produce wonderful shoots even wide open. But it's sharpness and colour are no way to compare to prime lenses.

Ok, just some shoots from my 28-300L, all from 5D2, handhold:

300mm @ f/5.6 (Max), ISO800, 1/320s:

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7185/6829438918_4445c5bba9_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/x_tan/682943891​8/  (external link)
Deer @ Halls Gap, Gippsland, Victoria (external link) by X_Tan (external link), on Flickr

300mm @ f/5.6 max, ISO1000, 1/250s:
IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7059/6828773202_c4dfd9dfaf_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/x_tan/682877320​2/  (external link)
Deer @ Halls Gap, Gippsland, Victoria (external link) by X_Tan (external link), on Flickr

More shoots from flickr 28-300L pool: http://www.flickr.com/​groups/585936@N24/pool​/ (external link)

Canon 5D3 + Zoom (EF 17-40L, 24-105L & 28-300L, 100-400L II) & Prime (24L II, 85L II, 100L, 135L & 200 f/2.8L II; Zeiss 1,4/35)
Sony α7r + Zeiss 1,8/55 FE
Nikon Coolpix A; Nikon F3 & F100 + Zeiss 1,4/50
Retiring  (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jm4ever
Senior Member
Avatar
854 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 417
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Welland, Ontario
     
Mar 18, 2012 07:52 |  #18

x_tan excellent quality shots there.

For me though between the 2 lens the op is looking at I would go 70-200 II and add a converter to it. I don't have one but from all accounts it's one of Canon's finest.

However one thing to remember is that for wildlife shots you'll often wish you had even a longer lens. So I would definitely look into the 100-400 or possibly the 400L 5.6.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Titus213
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
19,402 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 34
Joined Feb 2005
Location: Kalama, WA USA
     
Mar 18, 2012 11:02 |  #19

For the price of the 28-300 you can almost afford a 70-200/2.8 and a 100-400. While the 28-300 looks like a great compromise it is slow on both ends with f3.5 at 28mm and f5.6 at 300.

I would opt for the 70-200/2.8 IS. You can add a 1.4X to it and still have a good reach. I've used my 70-200/2.8 with a Canon 2X extender and while it works with enough light I wouldn't recommend going to the 2X as the images appear softer. (My 70-200 is not the Mk II which is supposed to be sharper).

And if your sports are indoors you'll appreciate the f2.8.


Dave
Perspiring photographer.
Visit NorwoodPhotos.comexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
7,691 posts
Gallery: 138 photos
Likes: 1405
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Mar 18, 2012 13:31 |  #20

Hugues, this is extremely strange for me to buy such a long lens but I just recently bought a 100-400L. I've been told to "change my ways" in determining what IQ means when you go for a long super tele zoom.

My 70-200 f/2.8ISmk2 is sharp as a prime lens at all focal lengths and is a crazy benchmark for IQ (even when you compare this zoom to a prime).

On the other hand the 100-400L is umm umm.... good sharp in my eyes. I've confirmed with an experienced bird photog that my copy is an excellent specimen haha. So this leads me to believe I must bite my tongue and accept the "good sharp" 100-400L.

I was soooooo close in purchasing a 70-300L due to size, weight and from what I've been told by many the IQ is very close to a 70-200 f/2.8IS mk1 (pretty darn good).

300mm maybe too short for safari. In most cases I'm assuming you'll be in good light so a long super tele with a mid or UWA zoom can cover alot of ground from amazing landscape to more detailed close up of wildlife.

I think another thing about long tele zooms is technique. Fast shutter speeds will assure more keepers unless you have a steady hand or shoot with monopod/tripod.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji - gone
Sony 2 x A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Sigma 24-70 ART | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Sigma ART 35 f/1.2 | FE85 f/1.8 | Sigma ART 105 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS & V1S

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
x_tan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,147 posts
Gallery: 137 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 462
Joined Sep 2010
Location: ɐılɐɹʇsnɐ 'ǝuɹnoqlǝɯ
     
Mar 18, 2012 17:18 as a reply to  @ AlanU's post |  #21

Thank jm4ever :)

The only reason I brought my 28-300L, which was as all-in-one travel lens - after I got so much dirt on my 400D sensor.

24-105L and 100-400L should be another option for travel combo, which is not much heavier than 28-300L, and more reach and bit cheaper.

I maybe the only very few persons here who is not a big fan of 70-200 as the reason I stated before.

If I have a donkey to carry all my gear for traveling, I will carry my 24L, 85L, 200L and 400L, that's all :D

Otherwise, I pick 5D2 + 85L, or 5D2 + 28-300L.


Canon 5D3 + Zoom (EF 17-40L, 24-105L & 28-300L, 100-400L II) & Prime (24L II, 85L II, 100L, 135L & 200 f/2.8L II; Zeiss 1,4/35)
Sony α7r + Zeiss 1,8/55 FE
Nikon Coolpix A; Nikon F3 & F100 + Zeiss 1,4/50
Retiring  (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DSLR-Canonier
Member
Avatar
172 posts
Likes: 13
Joined May 2009
Location: \\EARTH\EU\DE
     
Mar 18, 2012 17:24 as a reply to  @ x_tan's post |  #22

the 28-300L is one of the most underrated Canon lenses (with the 28-200 non-L). If you need the f/2,8 stop go for the 70-200. I own both lenses (70-200/2,8 IS II and 28-300L) and can say for most purposes is the 28-300 good enough. Only for low light situations is the 70-200/2,8 the better choice. Combined with a 16-35 is the 28-300 great for travelling - I can tell you it is not always easy to cheat airport staff with 20kg+ camera gear ;) I'm happy with my travelling combo (16-35 + 28-300 or 10-22 + 28-300).


Light-to-pixel (external link)-converter
// my Gear
regards

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gocolts
Goldmember
1,246 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Oct 2010
     
Mar 18, 2012 18:58 |  #23

DSLR-Canonier wrote in post #14108797 (external link)
the 28-300L is one of the most underrated Canon lenses (with the 28-200 non-L). If you need the f/2,8 stop go for the 70-200. I own both lenses (70-200/2,8 IS II and 28-300L) and can say for most purposes is the 28-300 good enough. Only for low light situations is the 70-200/2,8 the better choice. Combined with a 16-35 is the 28-300 great for travelling - I can tell you it is not always easy to cheat airport staff with 20kg+ camera gear ;) I'm happy with my travelling combo (16-35 + 28-300 or 10-22 + 28-300).

I agree. I think the price of the 28-300 new puts a lot of people off as well. I love mine on my 7D. Sure, it's not the fastest lens ever, but for a number of situations you don't need the fastest lens. And I've found that most of the shortcomings can be easily corrected in post work. I sold my 24-105L and picked up a used 28-300L, and couldn't be happier.

I would encourage anyone still on the fence to go check out the photo thread for this lens...as long as the size and weight don't bother you, and you can find a good copy for a good price, then I say go for it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Titus213
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
19,402 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 34
Joined Feb 2005
Location: Kalama, WA USA
     
Mar 18, 2012 19:24 |  #24

OK - How hard is it to get used to that push-pull operation?

http://www.luminous-landscape.com …lenses/canon-28-300.shtml (external link)


Dave
Perspiring photographer.
Visit NorwoodPhotos.comexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pfjbaldwin
Senior Member
Avatar
328 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Baldwin, MD
     
Mar 18, 2012 19:42 as a reply to  @ post 14105938 |  #25

I shoot sports with a 7D and the 70-200 II with a 1.4xIII TC. Sharpness amazes me even with a substantial crop. Evening games and indoor no flash I use just the 70-200 II because I need the f2.8 to stop action. With my 5DII, the 70-200II is a great wedding and portrait lens, incredibly sharp!!!

28-300 is a big heavy hunk of glass that needs substantial light with its f3.5-5.6. Great for birding or a safari.

I like the flexibility and handling ease of the lens and TC combination.


pfjohnsonphotography.c​om, pfjphoto.com, Baldwin, MD
CPS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timberlandlh
Senior Member
Avatar
450 posts
Joined Nov 2011
     
Mar 18, 2012 20:34 as a reply to  @ Tragic_Golfer's post |  #26

I've rented a 28-300L ...heavy and awesome captures. Just placed a bid on one 5 minutes ago. Also have a 70-200...lighter and awesome captures. It really depends on what you want to do. There is no one lens....nope notta, I tried. lol


Canon S100 and Canon 7D, Canon 28-300L 3.5/5.6 IS, Canon 70-200L 2.8 non IS, Canon 10-22 I'll give it a lil "l", Canon 50 1.8, LEE 10X Filter, Benro Travel Angel A-169....REI back pack, hiking boots and a photogenic black labrador

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rwhardy
Senior Member
404 posts
Joined Jan 2012
     
Mar 18, 2012 21:11 |  #27

i have the 70-200 is and it mates with my 1.4x and 2x pretty well. my understanding is that the is ii is even better.
with that being said, i still use my 300 f/4 or that lens plus the 1.4x way more for wildlife and today i shot a lot of planes in flight with the combo.
i mostly shoot wildlife and really don't find much need for the zoom. i also have the non is 70-200 f/4 and i have been considering selling both of them and buying more primes.
i find myself at either extreme but rarely at a spot between 70 or 200. i'd be happier with an 85 and 200 prime.
depending on what sports you are shooting i could see where a zoom would be more practical. if that's the case and the 70-200 is ii is within your budget i'd get it and both t/c's.
just my 2 cents. keep in mind, i'm an amateur.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
7,691 posts
Gallery: 138 photos
Likes: 1405
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Mar 18, 2012 21:38 |  #28

Titus213 wrote in post #14109341 (external link)
OK - How hard is it to get used to that push-pull operation?

http://www.luminous-landscape.com …lenses/canon-28-300.shtml (external link)

To be honest....I absolutely love the push/pull. Only thing to get used to is the turning the ring that tightens the barrel. For this type of FL zoom I think the push/pull can be extremely fast. It took me a matter of minutes to get use to the push/pull setup.

I think the "normal" zoom ring is more logical for the 70-200 and other shorter FL zooms. For the design of the "growing" extending lens of the 100-400L makes the push/pull operation very quick and easy.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji - gone
Sony 2 x A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Sigma 24-70 ART | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Sigma ART 35 f/1.2 | FE85 f/1.8 | Sigma ART 105 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS & V1S

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RAW ­ RAW ­ RAW
Senior Member
461 posts
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Tasmania
     
Mar 19, 2012 01:28 |  #29

Titus213 wrote in post #14109341 (external link)
OK - How hard is it to get used to that push-pull operation?

http://www.luminous-landscape.com …lenses/canon-28-300.shtml (external link)

AlanU wrote in post #14110177 (external link)
To be honest....I absolutely love the push/pull. Only thing to get used to is the turning the ring that tightens the barrel. For this type of FL zoom I think the push/pull can be extremely fast. It took me a matter of minutes to get use to the push/pull setup.

I think the "normal" zoom ring is more logical for the 70-200 and other shorter FL zooms. For the design of the "growing" extending lens of the 100-400L makes the push/pull operation very quick and easy.

Yep, it took me 2 min to get used to it..it works fine. I suspect that some people delight in identifying any difference as a problem or a negative. the lens works fine.

As to the dust issue identified in the linked article. the very reason that I have a 28-300 is to avoid dust. The innards of my cameras are clean and I want to keep them that way by NOT changing lenses (have you noticed that you always need "the other lens") to this end, the 28-300 rarely leaves my 7D. I DO have a 70-200 MkII and that sees time on my 5D II when needed. I transition between lenses easily...in fact the issue I have is with the 70-200 running out of zoom sometimes, I am too used to and spoiled by the awesome 28-300.

I generally have my 16-35 Mk II on the 5D II and only mount the 70-200 Mk II when needed mostly for portraits or low light work when I don't think I can force the 28-300 to comply.

I say buy the 28-300, see the light and enjoy the awesome power.:D




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MOkoFOko
nut impotent and avoiding Geoff
Avatar
19,889 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Michigan
     
Mar 19, 2012 01:31 |  #30

xarqi wrote in post #13638557 (external link)
Yeah - cross the 28-300 off your list, and add the 100-400.

I agree with this. For wildlife, you are going to want the 100-400L. The only benefit of the 28-300 is versatility.


My Gearlist

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,758 views & 0 likes for this thread
28 300mm or 70 200mm
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Boyota
895 guests, 320 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.