Anyone have experience with the Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM lens
I am looking at renting this lens to take to an outdoor event where anything can happen from right in front of me to 100yds away and I don't want to be burdened with 2 cameras fitted with lenses or have to constantly be changing lenses and loosing shots in the process. I am a bit concerned with the 3.7lbs of just the lens itself as that will turn into a noticeable chunk of hardware on my neck mounted on my 5D Mk III. So I am looking to see if any here have used this lens and their experience. From the outset it looks to be typical Canon "L" quality but the extreme zoom range tells me it will suffer somewhat @ either end on open apertures.
0
Comments
Paging @kwitko @Snarkasm @primesuspect
Sorry, I'm a Nikon guy.
fwiw, with a lens of that size, you mount the lens itself on the tripod/monopod (which is why you see the foot there). I don't have any experience with it, though - my highest is in the 70-200 family. You're right to expect some issues on either end, but the reviews I've seen indicate it fits your "one lens for everything" desires pretty well.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28-300mm-f-3.5-5.6-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
Give it a google and look for sample photos. I usually trust DPReview, but I couldn't find any formal reviews for the 28-300 on there.
I have zero experience with higher-end Canon lenses, sorry, but it looks very impressive!
@Snarkasm, thank you for your insight and link. I am quite aware of needing a tripod and thus the purpose of the shoe. But I am looking for something that will also allow me the freedom to move completely unencumbered and follow action as it happens. As i plan on being on the go all day long for 6 days. That will also rule out packing a tripod or even monopod. I do have and carry a telescopic monopod as well as a ves t that secures a camera to my chest. I am going to rent it for a week and pack my EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM and EF 70-200 mm f/2.8L IS USM just in case I can't get along with the rental.
I'm sorry!
If the weight bothers you, the f/4 70-200 might be the best mix between light and range. It's significantly lighter than the f/2.8. That said, if you can handle the f/2.8 regularly hand-held, the 28-300 registers only about 10oz heavier, so I don't imagine it would cause you too much trouble.
Let me know how you like it! And post some pics, of course.
Got the box with the lens this morning and got to Indy today for the NHRA Nationals. I didn't do much today after traveling much of the day but did check out the lens to become more familiar with it. I will give it a thorough run through the next 5 days while here. Then I will post my results including pics.
@primesuspect, thank you for turning me onto lens giant.
Can't wait to see the pics!
After 5 days of spotty weather, not good for racing or photography. I am impressed with the quality of the lens but not the handling. The first issue is the push pull to zoom and twist to focus. This really takes a lot to get used to but could be real handy if you can master the technique. Then there is the weight. I can handle my 70-200mm f2.8 IS USM with ease off tripod but at 1/2 pound more the 28-300 is just grizzly. The picture quality is what I would expect from a Canon 'L' series lens; well built, sharp images and color that comes out in even poor light such as I had all weekend. Keep in mind that it was either cloudy, overcast or low light in most pics.
Damn, that is nice
My final conclusion for anyone wanting to cover an outdoor sports venue is to carry 2 bodies with different lenses, such as my 24-105 and 70-200. I also did miss a bit of shooting due to low light. This was because the max aperture @ longer focal length was 5.6 and I couldn't sacrifice any more shutter speed. In 6 days I only got off 812 shots and know I would usually have shot more. This exercise did make me realize that all future lens purchases will be 'L' lenses!