If it's the newer 18-135 STM, which is also EF-S and IS as was the original, you really don't need to replace it. But if it was the kit lens to the original 7D then probably not an STM model. The 18-135 STM was the factory lens on my 70D. If you want a L lens but don't want to spend too much money, pick up a nice used EF 24-105 f/4L. Don't buy a new one, especially at retail price, they're not worth that kind of money. But a nice used one for around $450ish, well worth the money. A lot of people put down the 24-105L because it's made primarily of plastic, but it's a really good plastic. Also, if you can find a nice EF 28-70 f/2.8L for a good price, grab it.
Kuzano wrote:
Who's right on this one. I once read a lens review from Ken Rockwell on a lens Nikon built for film camera's during the "N" camera era. The lens was a standard kit lens for N55 to N85 film camera's. It was a cheap little G lens (no aperture ring - "gelded" per Ken). It was a 28-80 f3.3, and you could buy them endlessly on eBay for about $50 dollars. I bought 6 and used them on verious Nikon F mount camera's. I also used them on a number of Fujifilm S3 and S5 Pro bodies (Nikon D200 platform w/ Fujifilm digital sensor and electronics) and they were superb for IQ and sharpness.
They autofocus'd on everything I put them on except the "no focus motor" camera's, and they were sharper than most other Nikon lenses purchased at any price.
Who knows WTF you get when you buy different grade lenses from many manufacturer's.
I do know this is one more examply of why I don't buy anything without checking what Ken Rockwell says. It never hurts to look. Many blast the guy, but he's saved me a bunch of money, including calling Nikon and Canon lenses "turds" when they are.
Check Ken before making a move is my motto:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28-80mm-g.htm
I also listened to a pretty savvy guy (not Ken) tell me L lenses from Canon are over rated. A couple I've used certainly have been.
Who's right on this one. I once read a lens review... (
show quote)
I'm curious, what Nikon body did you use the crappy Canon L lens's on?!
I only have 1 of the 5 but I guess that's better than none. Personally, although I do like primes, I prefer high quality zooms. You may need more light but with todays hi-tech DSLR's if you're lacking light, crank up the ISO.
PixelStan77 wrote:
It all depends upon how you define "Best In Class Zoom". Whose word will you take to define that?
The lens I'm referring to is the Canon 28-300 f/3.5-5.6L zoom lens. It is the best lens manufactured by any company, in its class. No other lens manufacturer makes a 28-300 class zoom lens that has higher quality glass, better focus motor or vibration compensation vibration reduction image stabilization or whatever they call it, and overall build quality than the Canon lens, no one. It's not a really sharp lens but it's sharp enough. It will never win an IQ contest but I'm sure pictures taken with one have won photo contests. It's fairly large and a bit heavy and a bit pricey but it is the best in class and also quite versatile. And when mounted to a body with a 50.6 mp sensor, produces really good images.
My wife and I are members of Longwood Gardens and visit several times a year. Our last adventure to Longwood was to see Nightscapes back in October. I used a tripod that evening and as long as you don't get in the way or obstruct the flow of visitors, no one will bother you. I managed to get several nice photos of the lights that I probably wouldn't have had I not used a tripod. If you do use one I suggested one that's as lightweight and portable as possible. Longwood Gardens is fairly large and you will be collapsing the tripod when not in use and they can start getting heavy after a while. Good luck with your Longwood adventure, I hope you get lots of great photos and enjoy the place as much as we do.
Depends on the lens and the application. I have zoom lenses that are as sharp or even sharper than some of my primes. My walkabout lens is a zoom that can't match the IQ of any of my primes that cover some of the same focal lengths but to get the same coverage I'd have to carry around a lot of lenses. By using a best in class zoom I can cover a wide range of focal lengths without giving up too much on IQ and frankly the IQ from that lens is good enough. It's been my observations that many of the folks who are mainly concerned with how tack sharp an image is, don't usually see the whole picture. Not every image has to be technically as perfect as possible to be a good picture.
Thank you all for the guidance in helping me with my decision. After digesting the responses and checking out the reference sites I've ordered the 5DSr model. Now I need some really big memory cards...
And I thought my Sigma 150-600S was heavy. Not as much as that
beast. Good luck with your new toy and enjoy using it and the resulting photos...
Ducks are so cool; nice pics...
From 1 Chester County resident to another, for the type of photography you are doing, the 6D is with out a doubt the way to go. It's got great IQ, and unlike any 5D or the 50D, its got WIFI.
davidrb wrote:
The-digital-picture.com has an excellent side-by-side comparison of these two cameras. Bryan does a great job of differentiating the features of each. He is a photographer, not a lab rat and his reviews reflect that fact.
Thank you for the direction, I will take a look.
SharpShooter wrote:
Personally, I have no experience with the 5sr but have never had a problem(yet) with the 5s or any other camera for that matter. Unless these two cameras are way more susceptible to moire' than other cameras, I never even considered the sr.
First it has to happen. Then, it has to happen on a particular shot that would be award winning, or in some other way be a shot that mattered in some way. If it's never happened to you before(it's never happened to me!) why will it suddenly start happening, and then on the best shot you've ever taken.
If you're a super paranoid type, I'm sure it will happen all the time. If your a gambler, never gonna happen! :lol:
SS
Personally, I have no experience with the 5sr but ... (
show quote)
Uh, thank you for your response. The only difference between the 5DS and 5DSr is the cancelling of the low pass filter, and about $200. Other than that they are identical. The r version has slightly better resolution then the DS but with the low pass filter effect cancelled, the Sr is more susceptible to moiré. How much more I don't know. I'm just concerned the fine detail in the bird feathers may result in unwanted moiré, I don't know. I was hoping someone here would have experience with the camera.
shutterbob wrote:
It is a very sturdy Manfrotto that I have used in some fairly nasty conditions. And there are many rocks that I can secure to the tripod with a short section of rope if necessary. I have never been down into the crater but from what I have read it is much less windy than the ferocious gusts that occur on the rim.
If needed, you could put some rocks in the back pack and hang it from the tripod. Hope you have great weather and get some spectacular images...
I've saved up enough pennies to purchase a new FF body and since I've already got a bunch of Canon stuff I figured I'd get a new Canon. I'm looking at the new 5DS or the 5DSr and can't decide which one will better fit my needs/wants. From what I've read the odds of unwanted moiré with the 5DSr is slim and has a lot to do with the image subject. I enjoy photographing birds and am concerned the fine detail in feathers may cause the unwanted moiré with the 5DSr model. I do a lot of cropping so the sharper the detail the better. Any one have any experience with the 5DSr and or the 5DS?!
You mentioned a carbon fiber tripod would be making the trip. Isn't it fairly windy up there? It's been my experience with carbon fiber tripods unless you're in a very still environment, you need to hang some extra weight from the center to stabilize the tripod in the wind. They may be lighter than aluminum but they're not as stable, based on my experiences.