SANParks.org Forums

28-300 3.5-5.6L IS USM

i need info on this lens.DQ,since ive already bought the 100-400 do i need this lens as well?
i have a friend in Malaysia coming to SA this Friday and i need to ask him to bring me afew lenses.

It's not a super lens... I'm not a big fan of 10x zoom anyway.

If you have the 100-400 all you need is the short end, from wideangle to 100 mm, like the Canon 28-135 F/3.5-5.6 IS USM.
You may want to consider having him bring over the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM, or the 10-22 one that Madach has used a lot on his latest trip. He has posted a lot of photo's taken with that on his website.

If i were u i would invest in a wide-angel lens.
Then you have the whole area covered

DQ,ive got both these lenses i.e 17-40 and 10-22.its about time i go for some lessons.after my i other lenses arrive i will post in kit parade.
hoping this hobby doesnt turn to mental illness

too late, you are already inflicted, just prepare yourself for HUGE dents in your credit card

Dont mess around with Muhammad

Am interested in purchasing either one of these for my 20D in the next 6-10 months. I am covered on 200mm Prime currently with my 200mm F2.8 L MK2 and I do have the 17-85mm IS (EF-S). Only reason I am considering the 70-200 f2.8 is because of the flexibility of the zoom. Is the IS really worth it?

The 17-40mm is just a thought as I have a friend who want to get rid of his for R4350 and its L glass.

Oh yes! It's worth every dime you pay for it!

But if you have a look at the kit-topic you would see that i.e. Madach has both these lenses.
The 70-200 f/2.8 IS is called the sharpest lense ever made.

{Making space for Madach here....}

Will wait for his response (hopefully)

What about the non-IS version of the 70-200mm, have been offered it for around R7200

Same quality glass. Know a few guys how use it

It is one stop slower (f/4) but great glass. But if you can pay it go for the f/2.8 IS.

Planning to buy the same lens but nikkor! I have red fantastic comments on these kind of lenses. On a DSLR it gives you a focal distance of 105-300mm which is ideal for game and f/2.8 means superfast + on top of that IS (VR): no wonder it is super sharp.

Only the price keeps me from buying it today. (at the speed I'm saving money it will probably be in at least two years )

Ah-ha - another person with champagne taste & beer budget - like myself.

If only 2 years - but yes, that's what I'm aiming for - same lense

Just something to consider.

I use a 70 -200 IS f2.8 but do not think it is the sharpest lense ever made especially if you are using it hand held. ( Might be the sharpest for hand held images) My sharpest lense ever was the 300 F4 L which got stolen a long time ago so I upgraded to the 300 2.8. But I would seriously question spending so much more money on any 2.8 lense now with digital. In the days of Velvia 50 asa it was a big advantage but not when you can easily shoot with 200 asa. The lense I have heard so many people rave about is the 100 - 400 IS Not a 2.8 but perfect with digital. In Antarctica I know proffessionals who almost use nothing else.

Another advantage is that the 4.0L lenses weight a lot less and it easier to carry around. I only use 4.0L