Trading in 24-70L & 70-200 4.0 for a 28-300L?

D

Dan76

Messages
191
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all, having reading lots of reviews for the 28-300L, I'm minded to trade in my two 'super' lenses in order to fund buying one of these. Why? Well, I feel that the range is much more convenient for my use, especially with a lot of the 'walking around' shots that I take at events, when I'm chasing geese & various fauna down the Trent, and also for going on holiday with (I had a devil of a time swapping lenses on a recent holiday to Greece - not from a difficulty point of view, more that it was just a pain in the backside).

Has anyone had any long term experience with the 28-300L as their main walkaround? The main reason I'm asking is one that I can't really find any definitive answers to i.e. does the pump-zoom mechanism cause dust and bits to get sucked into the lens? As far as apertures go, I'm not totally fussed with the loss of the 2.8 that the 24-70 offers as I tend to us my nifty for arty/dark indoor shots.

Further down the line I'd like to get a 16-35L to address the lack of wider angle shots, but that's not a super-priority.

So from a line-up of:

24-70, 70-200 & others

I'd be going to

16-35, 28-300 & others.

Any opinions? :shrug:
 
I've used one a couple of times and it is a very convenient lens (ideal for things like shooting from planes) but:

1. It is heavy
2. It is only f/5.6
3. It is not that sharp

I've often hankered after one at the right price but it would be for specific uses and not all the time. 10:1 zooms have to work hard and it is a good 10:1 zoom, but not as good as the two you have (and probably weighs as much as both of them put together)
 
Thanks for that - I was thinking about the weight, but to be honest that doesn't really bother me too much (I've got good tendon strength ;) ). The sharpness would be an issue for me, but then with decent light and IS, you've got enough compensatory factors.

I just wandered away from this and came across another forum where someone else was in a similar situation, and it was recommended that they keep the lenses they have, and instead pick up a 100-400L.

Urgh I hate decisions like this.
 
It strikes me you are proposing to trade away from two of the best lenses in the line-up for a compromise lens that while still a good one has shortcomings. I can see your arguments (and sympathise with the lens swapping while on holiday problem) but I think you would regret the move. Could you hire the super-zoom for a weekend and see how it suits you?
 
not had the 28-300 but did have the 35-350 and I didnt like the push pull, also not over sharpe.
I would not swap my 28-70 and 70-200 for one,
 
Hi all, thanks for the input with this - I've been really busy so haven't had a chance to reply!

I'm not going to sell my lenses - I think I'll get the 16-35 to complete my 'in country' gear needs, but then maybe get a 28-300 or 100-400 for when I go on holiday next - best of both worlds then I reckon!!
 
Speaking from my experience of a Tamron 28-300, it's not exactly the BEST of both worlds. Soft, plenty of CA, barrel distortion etc. Possibly OK for 6x4 prints and web use but not really up to enlargements. I'm much happier with carrying the extra weight of more and better lenses than I was with the convenience of the superzoom. The missing 4mm might bother you as well, not to mention the 2 stops that you'll lose.

I'm sure the Canon L is a LOT better than the Tamron but you'll still be losing the 4mm and 2 stops (even if you don't think the 2 stops matter much).
 
If you're looking for a 'holiday lens' then get a Tamron 28-300. I've had one for years & it gives excellent results.

Obviously it's not a 'L' lens but it's £1700 pound cheaper which gives plenty of room to buy a 100-400 as well ;)



//edit//


Just seen the above post :D, my non-VC tamron didn't have any problems (that I noticed ;))
 
I tried a different strategy during my last holiday. Took three lenses with me to the States and simply guessed which I might use the most on each day and only took that one. Thus no lens swapping, no massive bag to haul around. Led to some minor usability issues, but I was not unhappy with them and I still got some great shots.
 
One thing to consider with the push-pull zooms is dust ingression....on a 5D2, you've got over 2.5x the sensor area for it to land on (compared to crop sensor....an in my experience, it does :(

Bob
 
Canon Bob said:
One thing to consider with the push-pull zooms is dust ingression....on a 5D2, you've got over 2.5x the sensor area for it to land on (compared to crop sensor....an in my experience, it does :(

Bob
Click to expand...

Ahhhh.. that's what I really wanted to know. There's lots of "oh yes it does/oh no it doesn't" out in internetland - that's why I only really trust this place ;)

Thanks everyone! I think I will rent one during spring to capture some baby animals with - might do a side by side with the Tamron just out of curiosity as well. I guess lensy-swappy is here to stay! Mind you, I did default to the 24-70 on my hols as it was mainly for landscape and street scenes. I suppose out on safari or something then I'd obviously default to the 70-200 - just depends where and when!

Thanks all :) :clap:
 
Canon Bob said:
One thing to consider with the push-pull zooms is dust ingression....
Click to expand...
Sorry Bob, but I'm going to have to disagree with you there. We have 30 100-400Ls, which I think qualifies as a reasonably good statistical sample. They amount of dust they shift around is no more than most conventional lenses, and far less than some.
 
StewartR said:
Sorry Bob, but I'm going to have to disagree with you there.
Click to expand...

No problem Stewart, experiences and opinions will always vary. I was more than happy with my 35-350L using it on crop bodies. Yes, there was always some dust around but probably no more than you'd suffer when continually swapping lenses....my experiences on a 5D were very different though.

Bob
 
Why not get another body? A 450D/40D with the 70-200 would give you a good range with only a small effective gap in the middle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top