Congrats, Mark!
I, too, recently succumbed to another bout of Lens Lust.
I hate it when words come back to bite you in the butt. The Wayback Machine helpfully informed me that here on these forums, about 18 months ago, I stated:
Now, here I am, with an EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS superzoom in my kit. Of course, my gear situation has changed a bit since then...added a 5DII, some primes and a UWA zoom (16-35 II).Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
I got it in large part for an upcoming trip, to see family, trying to save space in the bag. I wasn't concerned about the size/weight - not really different from the 70-200mm II or 100-400mm. I was planning on bringing the 24-105mm and the 70-200mm, and this sort of combines them in one lens, freeing up room in the bag for two primes instead of one (35L and 135L will go).
I'm not too concerned about the slow/variable aperture - comparing to the 24-105mm f/4L IS, once you get to f/4, it's more of a challenge to get good OOF blur, and in indoor ambient light, I'm usually reaching for a Speedlite at f/4. To me there's a significant difference between f/2.8 (good OOF blur, can shoot indoor ambient at ISO 3200) and f/4 (insufficient OOF blur for most portraits, need a flash indoors). However, even though the relative difference in light/aperture is the same, IMO the difference between f/4 and f/5.6 has much less significance. So, in some ways this will replace my 24-105mm f/4L IS, and it's like trading 4mm at the wide end for nearly 200mm at the long end - worthwhile to me.
Initial results are that it's sharper than I was expecting, even at 200-300mm. The lens handles quite well (I am very comfortable with the 100-400mm). Overall, I'm pleased - this will make a nice outdoor walkaround lens, lighter than carrying two lenses and no swapping needed.
Reply With Quote