2 lenses ....which is the better for me
Jul 11, 2013 07:21:39 #
Moray wrote:
I am looking for a lens and have narrowed it down ... (show quote)
"Is the quality of the L lens twice as great as the non L lens?"
"would I get great quality pics with the 28-135?"
Grab any lens that you have, stick it on your camera and take some photographs. If you can't get very pleasing photographs with that don't fool yourself, another lens is not going to improve your capabilities. Twice as great, great quality pics, not unless you, the photographer, has the capability.
Jul 11, 2013 08:14:24 #
I bought a sigma 18-250 several years past, it works fine for buildings, cars and other non- moving objects.I do not use it for people. For wild life I have a Canon 100-400mm, and Tamron 200-500mm plus several Marco Lens including a Canon 100mm. The six lens and three cameras is enough for now.
I have the Canon 40-50 &. 60D...I hope this helps some what.
I have the Canon 40-50 &. 60D...I hope this helps some what.
Jul 11, 2013 08:21:44 #
Moray wrote:
I am looking for a lens and have narrowed it down ... (show quote)
Buying the best quality optics ( L ) is primary. Highly recommend the 70-200 f2.8 ( I S included ) If need be wait and save your pennies and get this lens. Very versatile and likely to the most used.
Jul 11, 2013 08:22:09 #
Mmatu wrote:
I bought a sigma 18-250 several years past, it works fine for buildings, cars and other non- moving objects.I do not use it for people. For wild life I have a Canon 100-400mm, and Tamron 200-500mm plus several Marco Lens including a Canon 100mm. The six lens and three cameras is enough for now.
I have the Canon 40-50 &. 60D...I hope this helps some what.
I have the Canon 40-50 &. 60D...I hope this helps some what.
What makes you think that listing your stuff, which bears no resemblance at all to what the OP is asking about, possibly hope to be of any help at all?
Jul 11, 2013 08:26:58 #
winterrose wrote:
What makes you think that listing your stuff, which bears no resemblance at all to what the OP is asking about, possibly hope to be of any help at all?
Just added input from my experience, if you do like my "stuff" that is your opinion..
Jul 11, 2013 08:37:05 #
jwpulliam
Loc: New Harmony, In
I have both of the 70-200mm L lenses and would definitely spring for the image stabilized version. The non stabilized version is excellent, but needs a tripod from for the longer focal lengths. The image stabilized version so good that it can be used as a walking around lens. I would be happy to sell you the non stabilized version.
Jul 11, 2013 08:39:52 #
jwpulliam
Loc: New Harmony, In
I have the 28-135 is also, and it is a great lens, but if you do any cropping, it doesn't have the clarity of the L lens.
Jul 11, 2013 08:51:57 #
Mmatu wrote:
Just added input from my experience, if you do like my "stuff" that is your opinion..
I didn't say whether or not I liked your stuff as if either of us care but how do you think listing what you use could possibly help the OP decide between the two very specifically stipulated lenses?
Jul 11, 2013 09:39:44 #
sirlensalot
Loc: Arizona
Seems like a slightly uneven comparison because of the difference in range for each lens. I own the 70-200 non IS f/4. It is a keeper. The closest I get your comparison is my older 28-105 which I like also. Given a third option based on your description, I will ditto the 24-105 f/4.
Jul 11, 2013 09:44:05 #
scottbob
Loc: N.Y.C. to Raleigh, N.C.
Which Canon body are you using? Whether you have a full frame or body that has the 1.6 crop factor I would still go with the wider angle lens. Especially if it has the 1.6 factor. The EF lenses will fit on both, the EF-S lens will not fit the full frame body. Remember, you can always crop the composition you want as well. Hope this helps,good luck.
Jul 11, 2013 09:51:21 #
The 70-200 F4L is a great lens - all serious photographers should have one. You can/should put a Tamron 1.4X behind it, a tripod ring and monopod under it, and a Canon 500D close up lens in front of it. You can handhold it, but will be better to be on a good well articulated monopod ! ( or IS ) You might also consider the Tamron SP 28-105 F2.8 LD aspherical - another great lens - about $330 used when you can find them.
Jul 11, 2013 10:03:28 #
I use a 70-300 Nikor kit lens on my D90 as a walk around lens and it is seldom off the camera. Just crank up the shutter speed a little and you should get clear enough shots. The D90 with lens and battery pack is very heavy and everything is hand held. I am also old and shaky but it works for me.
Jul 11, 2013 10:59:40 #
I would vote for the 28-135, I personally use a 17-70 for a "Walk Around" everything form city buildings to landscapes, I prefer my 40mm or 50 mm for inside shooting, I don't use the 55-250 too often, Bob
Jul 11, 2013 11:07:31 #
Moray wrote:
I am looking for a lens and have narrowed it down ... (show quote)
Is or no IS does not make the lens. In my opinion the 70-200 is a much better lens, but 28-135 is better suited as a walk around lens. Its really apples to oranges.
Jul 11, 2013 11:49:07 #
Moray wrote:
I am looking for a lens and have narrowed it down ... (show quote)
Before I would buy a 18-135mm I would look at the 24-105mm f4.L. A little more open and a better quality lens.
Jim D
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.