Cameras - DSLR to be precise...

[munitalP]

I have a Canon EOS, I have a 24mm lens, a 35 to 75mm AF zoom and a 75 to 300mm AF zoom. On top of sun shields, filters, speed flash, auto shutter actuators and tripods, I want a new 35-200 (or similar) lens to carry with me as my every day lens.

I have found a couple that suit my needs, such as:

Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM - Ted's Cameras

or

Canon Lens 18-200mm EF-S f/3.5-5.6 IS - Digital Camera Warehouse

My question - does anyone use a lens with this level of zoom? If you do, how good are mid zoom photos (~125mm) in lower light levels?

munitalP

 

[djfuzz]

Which model EOS? Is it an APS-C (EF-S) or full frame sensor (EF)? I'm guessing the former based on the second lens you've suggested, but can't be sure.

Is there a particular reason you want the range you've specified?

I use the Canon 24-105mm f/4 IS as my walk-around lens, which would be the equivalent of 38-168mm on an APS-C sensor. Really great lens, and the constant aperture means you don't have to worry about losing a couple of stops at the greater focal lengths - the IS also 'adds' a stop or so, so it does perform slightly better in lower light. Also it's an L lens, so it's sealed and built to take a beating.

I still hold a candle for the 24-70mm f/2.8, but the lack of IS means that it's not so great for video which is important for me.

Great time to buy as well, with all the direct importing by local retailers finally shedding the negative perception of 'grey' market lenses. I'd pick one up from DWI or Digitalrev online, but even JB is coming to the party on price these days.

 

[munitalP]

Which model EOS? Is it an APS-C (EF-S) or full frame sensor (EF)? I'm guessing the former based on the second lens you've suggested, but can't be sure.

Is there a particular reason you want the range you've specified?

I use the Canon 24-105mm f/4 IS as my walk-around lens, which would be the equivalent of 38-168mm on an APS-C sensor. Really great lens, and the constant aperture means you don't have to worry about losing a couple of stops at the greater focal lengths - the IS also 'adds' a stop or so, so it does perform slightly better in lower light. Also it's an L lens, so it's sealed and built to take a beating.

I still hold a candle for the 24-70mm f/2.8, but the lack of IS means that it's not so great for video which is important for me.

Great time to buy as well, with all the direct importing by local retailers finally shedding the negative perception of 'grey' market lenses. I'd pick one up from DWI or Digitalrev online, but even JB is coming to the party on price these days.

Its a 400D (EF) or AKA Rebel. Great camera, I have had it 4 or more years, 10M Pix, good for what I want. I just wanted to shed some equipment while travelling. The 300mm zoom is great for the F1 in Singapore, but heavy and a PITA to carry around changing it out frequently. I am worried also with the number of lens changes I do in less than ideal weather may eventually damage my camera.

24-105 is a good size I guess, but not much different than a 35-75 I already have.

munitalP

 

[djfuzz]

I know what you mean about the 300mm - had one back when I was on the dark side (Nikon ) and it really was a pain. Nice for plane spotting in bright light though!

As I said though, the 24-105mm is actually 38-168mm on your camera body, so not too far off what you're after. And the constant aperture and IS on the L lens will do a lot to combat the light drop-off you're concerned about in the mid-zoom range.

I'd suggest it's worth a look anyway, particularly given the other ones you're looking at. I'm a fan of Kai Wong's reviews at DigitalrevTV, this is what he has to say about this lens:

Canon 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Hands-on Review (feat. 5D Mark II) - YouTube

Look forward to hearing what you end up getting in any case.

 

[munitalP]

I know what you mean about the 300mm - had one back when I was on the dark side (Nikon ) and it really was a pain. Nice for plane spotting in bright light though!

As I said though, the 24-105mm is actually 38-168mm on your camera body, so not too far off what you're after. And the constant aperture and IS on the L lens will do a lot to combat the light drop-off you're concerned about in the mid-zoom range.

I'd suggest it's worth a look anyway, particularly given the other ones you're looking at. I'm a fan of Kai Wong's reviews at DigitalrevTV, this is what he has to say about this lens:

Canon 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Hands-on Review (feat. 5D Mark II) - YouTube

Look forward to hearing what you end up getting in any case.

Im off to have a look. My biggest concern is as previously stated, low light, but add to that low light in a dull ice filled environment where the ice "sucks" up the available light, my small lens 2 years ago struggled, photos were quite "grey" and the ice became too green if you know what I mean.

Let me go look at the 24-105...

munitalP

 

[MatF]

I use a 24-70 f2.8L on my 5DmkII as a bit of a walkaround, though I'd prefer it to go a bit wider and it's also a heavy bugger of a thing.

Most of the time, to be honest, I tend to use my 17-40 f4L as a walkaround, particularly when travelling. I tend to find I'm mostly interested in landscapes and architecture, and I like the wider end. It pretty much lived on the camera when the Mrs and I went to Europe last year. I didn't find I wanted more zoom very often.

It depends on the kind of photography you're into. The 24-105 f4L is a more versatile lens than the 24-70 IMHO, and would be an ideal walkaround I think, provided you didn't want any wider than 24mm. Horses for courses I guess.

 

[moa999]

Any views from the 'pros' on the 4/3s, alphas.
Want a decent quality camera but not the bulk of a true DSLR, that also does good vid.

Looking at the Sony Alpha Nex-5N or the released in 2-days Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 with the super small 14-42 power zoom lens.
Both have good reviews and high interest levels on dpreview.

or am I just a wannabee shonk..

 

[Alanslegal]

Looking at the Sony Alpha Nex-5N or the released in 2-days Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 with the super small 14-42 power zoom lens.
Both have good reviews and high interest levels on dpreview.

I have a Nex5 and I probably wouldn't recommend it. I did downgrade from a dSLR though so I found the functions of the Nex5 too fiddly and time consuming especially if wanting to compose/adjust each shot. Unlike a dSLR in manual mode where you can just adjust the aperture, speed etc in the space of milliseconds, the Nex5 well took way too long. In the end the camera stayed in Auto mode and tried my luck each time. Some photos were great and some were ok. The panoramic feature is cool but the shutter is way too noisy to take discreet panoramic, also the low level lighting feature where it takes like 5 shots in milliseconds and layers on top of each other, the same thing, the shutter is way too noisy. I did speak to a Product Development Manager from Sony recently in regards to this, but they can't do anything about it at this stage. I then asked how can the Cybershot TX10's can take the panoramic and low level light shots without sound, and he explained it was because that cameras takes quick videos instead. That said, I love my waterproof, shock proof and Full HD TX10 and highly recommend it. Lucky I bought these cameras at staff rates less GST back through TRS so it saved me almost 45% of RRP. If I got the Nex5 at RRP I think I would have sold it on eBay a long time ago!

 

[simonpenny408]

Most pros would point you to the 28-105 if you just needed ONE walk around lens. If you're cashed up and don't mind the weight then obviously the 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8 lenses are the go

 

[casanovawa]

Well I'm not a pro, but after reading some of the review about Nikons and Canons and the 18-200 up to sort of 18 or 28 up to 250 or 270mm lenses, in the end i opted for a Canon 60D and an 18-135mm lens and it just stayed on the whole time while i was travelling round the world, seemed much simpler than changing lenses which is something i really didn't want to do... Its always swings and round about i guess, whatever you end up choosing will require compromises somewhere...

Because i'm not a pro and don't want to spend oodles of money until it could potentially earn me a few bucks, i did wonder about those extension tube type things??

 

[simonpenny408]

I would not use a teleconverter except if I had a name brand one (Canon, Nikon) and fast glass to begin with (f2.8 or better). My 2x Nikon works nice with my 70-200 and on a crop sensor body that gives me a 600mm reach but I lose 2 stops of light. If you use the doubler on a kit lens like the 18-135 could put you out at f11 at the long end which means it would need to be quite bright sunlight to be able to shoot it

And I would take the 18-200 over the 18-135 kit lens. 18-200 has more reach and it's a sharper lens. This is true for both Nikon and Canon. 28-105 is VERY sharp apparently - although I haven't shot it

 

[wile_e]

Hi munitalP, I shoot the Nikon version of their "super zoom" lens category (18-200 VR) and I think that it does most things reasonably well. When travelling, i find i have the lens on approx 75% of the time. In the occasions you're shooting in low light, I've snapped on my (very light and small) 50mm 1.4 which does the trick (if concerned with going wider, consider the 14 or 24mm as an alternative, although they are much larger than the 50mm). Obviously, you'll have to exercise the "two foot" zoom functionality with these primes . If you're keen on checking out some samples of the 18-200, pm and I'll fwd you a link to my gallery.

Cheers,
W

 

[casanovawa]

Hmmm, I would like to be more up to speed with all the technicalties for comparing these lenses and using them to best effect, but after reading up on these sorts of things in March-May last year, I haven't really touched the camera since coming back from my trip in August, so probably have to start all over again...