Lee Jay said:
yes. the FF Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L USM - a heavy, bulky, beast of a lens with borderline fantastic IQ.
argh. I recently evaluated this monster via the CPS loan program. the copy I received had experienced a lot of hard use - as the tripod collar wouldn't rotate (to shift from landscape to portrait on a monopod).
I do a lot of photography at a major botanical gardens - both with and without my sherpa (grin). But seriously, there are huge distances between where my car would be parked with additional lenses, etc. and where I might be shooting in need thereof. Thus the appeal of such "all-in-one's" with decent IQ. Sounds like an oxymoron, but...
The two good things I can say about this Canon L 28-300: It produces seriously impressive IQ. And the second virtue is its amazing image stabilization. While mostly on a pod, I shot this lens at sub 1/30th shutter speeds, at 300mm focal lenght, and had very high retention rates. It really happened. But at the end of a long day, I felt physically defeated - beaten up hauling & shooting with this monster (over hundreds of acres & who knows how many miles).
My Kirk MPA-1 monopod head even struggled to contain it. Note that I later learned that this head (a manfrotto 234 w/ a kirk AS plate in place of the manfrotto QR mess) was only rated for loads <6#. Perhaps that's why it was replaced by Kirk's current MPA-2 - rated at a load capacity of 80 lbs. - without the Manfrotto base.
Meanwhile, I have since acquired a clean copy of the discontinued Canon EF 35-350 L - a non-IS lens that is both lighter, shorter and ~half the price of the 28-300. I've yet to give it an honest workout - not wanting to shovel through the gardens, just yet.
I was once told that the best camera/lens is the one you have with you. When shooting over vast acreages, even WITH a sherpa, a trunk full of L glass is just impossible to cart about and have available. Even using rolling cases, it's a logistical nightmare - especially on your own. So the alternatives? Few, if any other lenses, can provide the IQ possible with these L lenses.
While I use the current EF-S 18-200mm on my 70D crop body, frankly - the IQ could be better. With careful post processing, I've had lots of success with the 18-200 - but I've seen the differences in IQ - and I know the extent of the IQ compromises. While I will probably, at some point, add Tamron's 28-300mm VC PZD (which also works on the APS-H, 1.3x crop bodies and on FF sensor bodies) and Canon's rumored EF-S 18-300mm to my kit, I do not expect to see anything supplant these "super-zoom" L lenses.
Except perhaps a combo, on FF & 1D series bodies, of a 24-70mm (f4 or f2.8 ) and the 70-300mm L.
Then again, ymmv.
Upvote
0
