Old 12-11-2007, 02:58 PM   #1
Kevin W-S
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
Default What Canon lens do you recommend ?

What Canon lens do you recommend - but at a reasonable price? I cannot for instance afford an L lens so it would be pointless discussing these....

Your input would be appreciated!

At the moment I use a 90-300mm (very good), 28-105mm kit lens (rubbish). I am looking for a replacement for the latter basically - I think anyway, unless someone has any other suggestions.
Kevin W-S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2007, 03:04 PM   #2
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin W-S
What Canon lens do you recommend - but at a reasonable price? I cannot for instance afford an L lens so it would be pointless discussing these....

Your input would be appreciated!

At the moment I use a 90-300mm (very good), 28-105mm kit lens (rubbish). I am looking for a replacement for the latter basically - I think anyway, unless someone has any other suggestions.
Which 28-105? The 28-105 f/4-5.6 is considered to be of poor quality (I didn't know it was being used as a kit lens). The 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 is of much better quality and is very good as a modest step up over a kit lens.

If you are shooting with a crop-sensor body, then as long as you are considering replacing that lens, think about going wider than 28, which is hardly wide angle at all on such a body.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2007, 03:11 PM   #3
Kevin W-S
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
Default

Quick reply! Thank you! The f4 5.6 - your guess was right.

It was sold as kit lens here in South Africa. Mutter!

I would like (stress like) the 28-105mm but cannot afford this. When you say go wider, what did you have in mind. Wider and less zoom?

I will certainly look at the lens you suggest. I looked at the review here

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...3545/index.htm

which is fair.

Thanks.
Kevin W-S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2007, 03:26 PM   #4
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin W-S
I would like (stress like) the 28-105mm but cannot afford this. When you say go wider, what did you have in mind. Wider and less zoom?
Yes, wider and less zoom. A Sigma 17-70, for example (fine lens!), will serve you much better than a 28-105, especially since you have 90+ covered already. But it is really up to you, if you never shoot wide angle, then you don't need it. But 28 as your widest angle, in my view, means you are missing a lot of choices with respect to composition.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2007, 03:33 PM   #5
Kevin W-S
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
Default

This one? Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC IF Macro Lens. If it is I can afford it!

I looked at the review

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...2845/index.htm

which is good.

I must admit that I have been wary of Sigma lens - had 2 and they were not too good. One was the 50-500mm (much plugged by everyone) - ugh. Used it for birds byt replaced everything with Canons.

Last edited by Kevin W-S; 12-11-2007 at 03:37 PM.
Kevin W-S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2007, 08:40 PM   #6
trainboysd40
Senior Member
 
trainboysd40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta on the CP Laggan Subdivision
Posts: 2,048
Send a message via MSN to trainboysd40
Default

Bah, your first line discouraged me...I was going to reccomend the 24-105L! Considering that your other lens starts at 90, I would agree that you should go wider. The sigma mentioned above would be a good choice, and I definitely reccomend the Canon 17-85 EF-S if you don't want to get the Sigma. However, Sigma does make good lenses, so don't rule them out just yet!
__________________
got a D5 IIi and now he doesnt afread fo 12800 iSO
Youtube (Model Railway, Vlogs, Tutorials, and prototype)
My Website
Obligatory link to shots on RP, HERE
trainboysd40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2007, 09:49 PM   #7
ken45
LA&SL Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 700
Default

I'd recommend the 28-135 IS lens by Canon. I use it for 99% of my shots, and like it quite a bit. It's not the widest thing around, but gets wide enough for me unless I'm standing fairly close to the tracks. Plus, the 135 combined with the crop factor gives you moderate telephoto capabilities. It's also reasonably priced, IMO.
__________________
My Railpictures Shots http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=2561
ken45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2007, 02:36 AM   #8
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin W-S
This one? Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC IF Macro Lens. If it is I can afford it!

I looked at the review

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...2845/index.htm

which is good.
I love this lens...sometimes I think I like it even more than my 70-200 f/4L...
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2007, 02:49 AM   #9
Googanelli
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38
Default

What lens to get depends on what you are wanting to do. I have 5 lens now and know what my next lens will be. The sigma 30mm 1.4 is my next purchase. It has excellent reviews, it's decently priced, and seems to be a great carry around lens. It will give you sharp shots with a normal view that will allow you to crop readily.

-Joe
Googanelli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2007, 02:22 PM   #10
TAMR159
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 367
Default

Go for the 70-200 F/4.0L. It's under $600...priced with the regular glass, even though it's L glass quality. An extremely good deal for the price...even if it takes a little extra saving, it will be well worth it in the end!
TAMR159 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2007, 04:13 PM   #11
Kevin W-S
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
Default

Thanks everyone for the suggestions - I now have something to think about. I am milling over a couple of things now..... !

Need to decide before the weekend as I have one chance at a special engine that will run....

Last edited by Kevin W-S; 12-12-2007 at 04:24 PM.
Kevin W-S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2007, 04:24 PM   #12
Kevin W-S
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
Default

In the case of the Canon L 70-200mm the review implies (maybe) a possible quality issue - any users with a comment here?

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...00_4/index.htm
Kevin W-S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2007, 04:44 PM   #13
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,890
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin W-S
In the case of the Canon L 70-200mm the review implies (maybe) a possible quality issue - any users with a comment here?

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...00_4/index.htm
Skimming over the link you provided, I didn't catch the possible quality issues, but then my eyes started glazing over when they were using charts and graphs to tell you how good a lens is.

I have this lens and use it a lot. With my 10 to 22 mm lens, I use these about 90 percent of the time I shoot with the kit lens -- I've still got to upgrade there -- being used maybe ten percent of the time. The 70 to 200mm f4L is a super lens. Al of us on this board uses it. It's light weight. Anyone should be able to use it without a tripod. The quality is amazing. Thre are many, many examples of shots I take with it and don't have to do much sharpening at all right out of the camera. (Downsizing for the internet not included.)

I highly recommend this one. In fact, when I do finally upgrade away from the kit lens, I want to get it's baby brother, the 24 70 77 mm f4L.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2007, 05:00 PM   #14
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin W-S
In the case of the Canon L 70-200mm the review implies (maybe) a possible quality issue - any users with a comment here?

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...00_4/index.htm
I'll let the photos I've taken with it do the commenting...
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2007, 05:32 PM   #15
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,890
Default

Taken with the lens in question on my 400D --

Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©


and then cropped down significantly. I hadn't set up for a crossing shot, but after the third car crossed in front of the train, I couldn't resist. So it was stretched out to 200 mm and then croppec down by half if not more.

Another --

Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©



Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2007, 08:33 PM   #16
ottergoose
American Gunzel
 
ottergoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 1,626
Send a message via AIM to ottergoose Send a message via Yahoo to ottergoose
Default

I got a heads up from Santa that I'll soon be the owner of the Canon 28-200... I hope it works out alright, the lens has generally positive reviews. I'll have plenty of sample pictures to look at in a few weeks...
__________________
Nick Benson | Pictures | Website | Flickr | Profile | JetPhotos | Twitter
ottergoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2007, 09:23 PM   #17
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

The Canon 70-300IS is a great lens, all of my telephoto shot's on RP where taken with it (Note I dont have many telephotoshot's on RP). Works great for sports also. I have just upgraded to the Canon 70-200mm F2.8L IS though.
Walter S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 11:12 AM   #18
Kevin W-S
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
Default

Well, I have decided on the Sigma 17-70 DC to start with. It is not available here, so I will have to order one.

Will look at the Canon 70-200 F4 without IS as a second step (and for use as a supplementary birding and wildlife lens) when I have the cash. Will let you know how I get on.

Last edited by Kevin W-S; 01-08-2008 at 05:50 AM.
Kevin W-S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 03:34 PM   #19
MichaelJ
The Photo Journalist
 
MichaelJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sydney, NSW
Posts: 630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
Which 28-105? The 28-105 f/4-5.6 is considered to be of poor quality (I didn't know it was being used as a kit lens). The 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 is of much better quality and is very good as a modest step up over a kit lens.
How is the EF 28/105 F/4-5.6 USM lens considered 'poor quality'? I have been using it for nearly a year now and had nothing but good results!
__________________
My portfolio at RailPictures.Net!
My portfolio at Flickr!

The views expressed in this reply are personal and do not represent the views or policy of my employer.
MichaelJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 03:48 PM   #20
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelJ
How is the EF 28/105 F/4-5.6 USM lens considered 'poor quality'? I have been using it for nearly a year now and had nothing but good results!
OK, poor -> poorer, that is what I should have written.

I responded based on my reading of various different photography boards over the years; I only used the f/3.5-4.5 version myself. Of course, one can get good shots with just about any lens, as witnessed by the many fine shots make with kit lenses of all sorts (including me with the 18-55).
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2008, 03:09 AM   #21
MichaelJ
The Photo Journalist
 
MichaelJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sydney, NSW
Posts: 630
Default

Ak ok, I understand now ...

I have not seen the other version in Australia, but am keen to find out how much it would be.
__________________
My portfolio at RailPictures.Net!
My portfolio at Flickr!

The views expressed in this reply are personal and do not represent the views or policy of my employer.
MichaelJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2008, 05:55 AM   #22
Kevin W-S
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
Default

My the EF 28/105 F/4-5.6 USM lens is poor - very soft. If I take raw and sharpen I can fix the photos, but photos straight off are of poor quality. It could be I have a poor lens or you have a great one - maybe the latter.

Independent reviews in general on the Net also are not good.

But if your lens is good and works for you, do not let any of this put you off !
Kevin W-S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2008, 09:42 PM   #23
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,745
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter S
The Canon 70-300IS is a great lens, all of my telephoto shot's on RP where taken with it (Note I dont have many telephotoshot's on RP). Works great for sports also. I have just upgraded to the Canon 70-200mm F2.8L IS though.
Walter, if you say the 70-300 is a great lens, I'd like to hear your opinion of your new lens. (I'm jealous, by the way. )
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2008, 04:40 PM   #24
Kevin W-S
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
Default

OK - the Sigma 17-70 is ordered. My heart is sore - I wanted the Canon 24-105 but at 4 times the price, alas it is not to be!

Hopefully the Sigma lives up the punting it has been given!
Kevin W-S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2008, 06:07 PM   #25
Andrew Blaszczyk (2)
Senior Member
 
Andrew Blaszczyk (2)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marlboro, NJ
Posts: 1,956
Send a message via AIM to Andrew Blaszczyk (2) Send a message via Yahoo to Andrew Blaszczyk (2)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin W-S
OK - the Sigma 17-70 is ordered. My heart is sore - I wanted the Canon 24-105 but at 4 times the price, alas it is not to be!

Hopefully the Sigma lives up the punting it has been given!
Excellent, excellent choice! I just found this thread for the first time and was quite baffled by everyone recommending lenses that were the same focal lenghts as the one you have already! Anyway, I was pretty much ordered by a big-wig here on RP to get the Sigma after my Canon kit lens broke and I found my Canon 28-85 couldn't go wide enough for my style of shooting. I have since recommended it to other RPers looking at lenses (one of whom has contributed to this thread) and swear by it myself. It is very versatile and goes great with my Canon 75-300mm which I plan on selling to get the 70-300 IS which Walter mentioned/owns.

Hope you like it! Looking forward to seeing the results.
__________________
-Andrew Blaszczyk a.k.a. AB(2)
Proud fan of the Sabres, Islanders, Rockies, and Lions.

"My camera is an artistic medium, not a tool of terrorism."

www.ab2photography.com Coming soon!
My photos on RailPictures:
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=960
Andrew Blaszczyk (2) 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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.