Hi,
I am planning to buy 50D next month and I am not able to make decision between EF-S 18-200 or EF 28-135. Please advice.
- Bittu
Printable View
Hi,
I am planning to buy 50D next month and I am not able to make decision between EF-S 18-200 or EF 28-135. Please advice.
- Bittu
Quote:
Originally Posted by bittu
Can I vote for theEF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS [H] Are you looking for a one lens does it all setup? If I must choose between theEF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS and the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS I would vote for the EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS.
Other lenses to consider:
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS
EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS
Quote:
Originally Posted by bittu
What do you shoot?
What is your budget?
What are your goals?
Is there a forecast of buying more lenses in the future?
Yes Mark I am looking for a lens which does it all a general purpose with less zoom is fine. Thanks for you suggestions, I will definitely look into this options.
Thanks again.
What do you shoot? for now I want a general purpose lens, which I can use for landscape, people, flowers, sunrise, sunset, etc.
What is your budget? anywhere between $1000-$1500 for both Camera and lens
What are your goals? stick to budget and but something good.
Is there a forecast of buying more lenses in the future? Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM Lens in another 6 months or so, because I love wilelife photography.
If you could go another $700 you could get a 50D body only and get the 24-105mm IS F4 L. The 24-105mm IS f4 L is a good general walk around lens and it is L glass as well.
Then when you get your 100-400mm you will have 24-400mm covered with Canon's better L series lenses.
IMHO, you may find 24 or 28 mm not wide enough, don't forget 50D is a 1.6 FOVCF body,so youwill wind up with equivalent lenghts of 38 or 44mm respectively.
I think zooms starting with 17-18mm are more practical. These aremy suggestionsin the order I like them:
Canon EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS
Canon EF-S 18-85 4-5.6 IS
Canon EF 17-404.0 L
EF-S 18-200 3.5-5.6 IS
Read Brian's reviews and see what would work for you best. And remember, there is no perfect lens, every lens has its pros and cons.
Bittu I have the 50D and I went for the 18 - 200, it is fine as a general lens but am not happy with it for portrait work. There is a fine line with what I am content with when shooting portraits (without a flash) and this seems to be between the 45 - 80mm mark at at least f/8 and above, anything outside this focal length and below this aperture setting the subjects DOF is too soft / blurry for my liking.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] Push up the focal length to high and you will get the eyes in focus but the nose will be out of focus, not what I need personally.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] I have done a fair bit of flash work with the 50D and 430exII and must say that it is very forgiving and produces’ pleasing results.
Just keep in mind that this lens, for me, likes the high aperture settings, especially when light is not on your side.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] In hind sight I would have opted for the 28 – 135, but that is just me.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] You will be happy with the body, it is great.<o:p></o:p>
Thanks Scott for writting in detail.
Looking at replies and suggestions. I have decided to go with EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. I think this is in my budget as well as it has wide angle to decent telephoto zoom.
Thanks to All you guy's for your replies.
Well.....here's the thing. The 18-200mm is obviously more appealing because of the huge range you get, but I don't believe the image quality is going to compare.
When you're talking such a huge range like that, it's tougher to get a better image.
I have the 28-135mm and I'm pretty happy with it. It's an older design, but the IS works well, picture is good, the auto focus is quick enough, and you have the full time manual focus, with the USM.
If you read the reviews for the two lenses on this site, it'll say just that. He doesn't like the results of the 18-200 as much as he could.
You know what you should check out? The Tamron 18-270mm I beleive it is. My best friends fiance got the lens, and it seemed to take pretty good shots. Plus, the 15x zoom is unbelieveable for an SLR lens. I haven't used it myself, so I can't give it a review.
Still, I've been very happy with the 28-135mm as a standard, walkabout lens. I have the 70-200mm and 100-400mm planned for my future, so I wasn't really worried about the longer end.
I think I'm going to get the "kit" 55-250mm in the interim, just to have that extra zoom. I've had that lens before, and for the sub $300 price range, having IS,is a pretty good deal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bittu
That's easy. 18-200 hands down. It not only has far greater range, but it is optimized optically for your sensor size, so it has higher contrast and resolution than the 28-135. (The 28-135 must cover a much larger image circle, so it's no surprise that it is beaten by the 18-200.)