• The Canon Rumors Forum has officially been shut down as of July 10, 2026.

    All data will be deleted on September 16, 2026.

    the ad free experience will return by July 17, 2026.

New Superzoom Development? [CR1]

StudentOfLight said:
I used a friend's Nikon APS-C body recently and the variable aperture kit lens annoyed the crap out of me. I don't like using auto/semi-auto metering modes so definitely would only be interested in fixed maximum aperture lenses.

While most of my lenses are f/2.8 or faster, I'd be willing to trade in trade in one stop of ISO performance for the convenience of a zoom and if it's a static subject then there's always the latest generation of kickass IS to make up for the loss of light-gathering capability.

In terms of focal range, if I can live with the angle of view of the 24mm pancake on APS-C then I can easily live with 28mm on the wide end and I love 70-200mm for portraits and reasonably close-by subjects. Anything further away either gets treated as a snapshot (only for ID purposes) or needs a dedicated lens for it to be a keeper.

So summarizing, I'd say 28-200mm f/4 IS USM would be great walk-around lens from my perspective. I'd much rather have a brilliant 200/4 than a mediocre 300mm f/5.6.

Why not just set the aperture to 5.6 instead of 3.5, so it stays constant? I'd be intrigued by your 28-200/4 though. Better yet, 25-200/4.
 
Upvote 0
LonelyBoy said:
StudentOfLight said:
I used a friend's Nikon APS-C body recently and the variable aperture kit lens annoyed the crap out of me. I don't like using auto/semi-auto metering modes so definitely would only be interested in fixed maximum aperture lenses.

While most of my lenses are f/2.8 or faster, I'd be willing to trade in trade in one stop of ISO performance for the convenience of a zoom and if it's a static subject then there's always the latest generation of kickass IS to make up for the loss of light-gathering capability.

In terms of focal range, if I can live with the angle of view of the 24mm pancake on APS-C then I can easily live with 28mm on the wide end and I love 70-200mm for portraits and reasonably close-by subjects. Anything further away either gets treated as a snapshot (only for ID purposes) or needs a dedicated lens for it to be a keeper.

So summarizing, I'd say 28-200mm f/4 IS USM would be great walk-around lens from my perspective. I'd much rather have a brilliant 200/4 than a mediocre 300mm f/5.6.

Why not just set the aperture to 5.6 instead of 3.5, so it stays constant? I'd be intrigued by your 28-200/4 though. Better yet, 25-200/4.
I was shooting with an older generation APS-C sensor and in dimly lit conditions was a huge disadvantage. Outdoors is fine to shoot f/5.6 but indoors when you can hardly get a usable image at ISO 1600 ... (who am I kidding none of those images were usable.) Also the flash was malfunctioning so I had to shoot ambient only. Brings me to tears :'( Anyway, I eventually just resigned myself to shoot at 18mm f/3.5 indoors.
 
Upvote 0