Help and advice on new lens I wish to get Please.

Chaz Photos

Chaz Photos

Jack Elam
Messages
6,283
Name
Chaz
Edit My Images
Yes
I am about to buy a 50D
I have a 30D Sigma 10-20mm 17-70 and 70-300mm
Was thinking of getting a canon 28-135is
But not sure if it the right way to go.
Lens I have also looked at are

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 L IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm F4.0L USM
will a TC work with them?
Guess a TC will work with a
Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L USM but this has no IS
I like to do wild life but not sure which will work best.
Also looked at the Sigma 150-500.
Your comments please
 
You'll struggle with a tc, even a 1.4x on any of those lenses. I would think at best you'd have a pretty dark viewfinder and at worst manual focus only.
 
Most of those lenses will be fine with a TC. 1.4x extender/TC adds one stop, so the f/2.8 and f/4 lenses will be okay to AF (up to f/5.6 on 30D). 100-400 and the Sigma will not.

The lenses you have listed are not really comparable, either in focal length, size, weight or price. If you try them, you will quickly see which ones suit you best. For wildlife, you will need reach.
 
Your best options for wildlife lenses from the ones you mention are the canon 100-400mm or the sigma 150-500mm. I really think you should be looking at 400mm as a minimum focal length.
 
The 28-135 is a nice lens, I used it as a walkaround for many years and also used it for weddings, funerals and bamitzfa's barmitsfers bermatfor Jewish events to great effect. Then I used "L" glass with 2.8 apertures.

The 28-135 is adequate, but save up and get the expensive stuff if you can, it really is worth it.
 
Ive just got a 70-200 F4/L for my 50 and its pin sharp and easy to handhold. It works fine with a 1.4 tc as well. Its also about half the price of the other L lenses you have mentioned, but as has been mentioned its probably not long enough for wildlife even with a 1.4 its only 280mm.
 
If you're main use for the new lens is to photograph wildlife only the 100-400 and 150-500 really stack up, the others are too short.
The 100-400 and 150-500 regularly get slated on many forums, normally being accused of being soft at the long end and wide open. In my experience of about a dozen 100-400's owned by myself or friends of mine I've never seen any evidence of this. I've no experience of 150-500's other than sharing a bird hide with owners swearing their head off at them as the lenses hunted for a focus lock in light the 100-400 banged into focus in.
I used a 1.4x tc on the 100-400 with the pins taped on a 20d with reasonable results although I believe the 20d/30d work better with taped pins than the newer bodies.
I used my 100-400 regularly as a walk around lens and my only regret is selling it:(
I'm not sure I'd pay the price of a new one, they come up for sale s/h regularly.
 
That's a real lucky dip of lens options you have there Chaz. The 28-135mm IS is over-priced and a bit of a duffer these days. You're better with your 17-70mm.

As to wildlife lenses you ain't gonna get anywhere, apart from a few zoo and doggie shots, with anything less than 400mm. Having owned most options I'd go for the 150-500mm OS. The OS works amazingly well and at f8 it's very capable. The best bang per buck long zoom around.

The 4.0 and 2.8's will AF fine with a 1.4x tcon, though speed may be compromised. The 70-200 IS L 4.0 is probably the best zoom you can buy IQ/IS wise and is more than usable with a 1.4x, even wide open. But it's too short for wildlife most of the time.

Seems you need to define your priorities and budget.
 
paul_g said:
If you're main use for the new lens is to photograph wildlife only the 100-400 and 150-500 really stack up, the others are too short.
The 100-400 and 150-500 regularly get slated on many forums, normally being accused of being soft at the long end and wide open. In my experience of about a dozen 100-400's owned by myself or friends of mine I've never seen any evidence of this. I've no experience of 150-500's other than sharing a bird hide with owners swearing their head off at them as the lenses hunted for a focus lock in light the 100-400 banged into focus in.
I used a 1.4x tc on the 100-400 with the pins taped on a 20d with reasonable results although I believe the 20d/30d work better with taped pins than the newer bodies.
I used my 100-400 regularly as a walk around lens and my only regret is selling it:(
I'm not sure I'd pay the price of a new one, they come up for sale s/h regularly.
Click to expand...
Can you explain what the pins taped up is all about?
I am thinking I use the 50D as it has the pixels I can crop if needed
 
So I am now thinking that the 28-135is and the 100-400mm is the best then the 70-200 with a TC
I was thinking that maybe the 70-200mm f2.8 can be a good lens and when I do wildlife I use it with the TC.
The cost is only £100 more for the 70-200 I know I have to buy a TC as well I am just thinking I would get more range from the 70mm up.
 
Chaz Photos said:
Can you explain what the pins taped up is all about?
I am thinking I use the 50D as it has the pixels I can crop if needed
Click to expand...

Covering 3 of the pins with tape on the tc fools the camera into thinking that there is no tc attached. Therefore it will still try to autofocus even though the aperture is f8 or worse wide open when Canons af system only works with f5.6 lenses and faster, except for the 1 series cameras which af at f8
I'm assuming you would use a Canon tc, some of the cheaper 3rd party tcs dont even have these pins fitted.
One thing I would add is that although among bird photographers taping pins is a very common practice it is basically getting around a design limitation that Canon implemented and there can be no guarantee that a lens may not be damaged by continually hunting for a focus lock in poor light.
 
Chaz Photos said:
Can you explain what the pins taped up is all about?
I am thinking I use the 50D as it has the pixels I can crop if needed
Click to expand...

Taping the pins doesn't work in my experience, but google it and you'll see. If you hold the extender/TC lens side towards you with the pins at the top, the ones to tape over are the three on the left.

Paul's point above about it working with earlier cameras might explain the confusion over this trick, but I have a 40D and 100-400L, and it doesn't work. It works at 100mm, but when you get past 200mm the lens just hunts and dithers around endlessly. As I understand it, the problem is that the cone of light entering the camera is reduced by the TC and this is what affects AF, not the f/number as such, so just tricking the camera has no effect. But there is some headroom on most cameras beyond f/5.6 and I guess this is what Sigmas and Tamrons depend on to function at f/6.3, even if it's not that good.
 
HoppyUK said:
Taping the pins doesn't work in my experience, but google it and you'll see. If you hold the extender/TC lens side towards you with the pins at the top, the ones to tape over are the three on the left.

Paul's point above about it working with earlier cameras might explain the confusion over this trick, but I have a 40D and 100-400L, and it doesn't work. It works at 100mm, but when you get past 200mm the lens just hunts and dithers around endlessly. As I understand it, the problem is that the cone of light entering the camera is reduced by the TC and this is what affects AF, not the f/number as such, so just tricking the camera has no effect. But there is some headroom on most cameras beyond f/5.6 and I guess this is what Sigmas and Tamrons depend on to function at f/6.3, even if it's not that good.
Click to expand...

Try using an off centre af point. Many people on another forum were disappointed that the 40Ds are nowhere near as good as 30Ds with taped tcs and found shifting the af point helped. As I said it is basically a bodge and does seem to vary from camera to camera and lens to lens
 
Chas,
I would deffo NOT get the 28-135mm IS, it's an old lens and not particularly sharp. The 70-200 f/4 L IS is one sharp cookie, granted you could only use the 1.4x extender with AF.
If you want something at the wider end, consider the 24-104 f/4 L IS, that also is a great lens.

Have a look at the link below for sample shots taken with all lenses you are considering and the ones I have mentioned also.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=141406
 
andydajo said:
Chas,
I would deffo NOT get the 28-135mm IS, it's an old lens and not particularly sharp. The 70-200 f/4 L IS is one sharp cookie, granted you could only use the 1.4x extender with AF.
If you want something at the wider end, consider the 24-104 f/4 L IS, that also is a great lens.

Have a look at the link below for sample shots taken with all lenses you are considering and the ones I have mentioned also.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=141406
Click to expand...

What would you say in place of the 28-135 I have the sigma 17-70 which cover a good range I was thinking of what best to have on both the 30D and 50D ie one long and one short zoom
 
No question the 24-105L is superb but it's designed for full frame so is a bit long for walkabout at 24mm. 17-55 2.8 is the best lens on crop cameras. But if you have the 17-70, and unless you are unhappy with it, anything else would seem like a very costly option.

FWIW, I have 10-22, 17-55 2.8, 70-200 4 IS, and 100-400L. Having the two long zooms looks like a luxury, which it is :D , but for wildlife you really need reach and the 100-400L seems to be the best all round way of getting it. But that is a big lens and hard work if you don't need it, hence the 70-200, which isn't.

Depending on your needs and budget, you could look at the 70-300 IS or maybe go for the 100-400L and fill the short end gap with the cute/sharp/cheap 55-250 IS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top