Upgrading from EF-S 18-20mm.

[DSLR_Newbie]

Hi,

I wish to upgrade from my existing 18-200mm lens to something better and before everyone starts raving about the 70-200 F2.8 II I would like to stop you there. I know its a great lens but its not in the budget.

I am a very casual photographer with a 60D and going pro is not on the cards. I use my camera to take pics of my family and that's pretty much it. I use the 17-55 indoors but i need something for the outdoors with a bit of a reach. the 18-200mm is fine but wanna upgrade to something that is optically better.

In terms of the budget...I can stretch MAX up to price range of 1200(with a lot of explaining and convincing the Mrs. and including whatever i can get for the 18-200) Cheaper options would be great.

Thanks

[neuroanatomist]

If 200mm is as long as you need/want, the 70-200mm f/4L IS is in your budget and is a versatile and excellent lens (optically pretty much equivalent to the 70-200/2.8L IS II). If you just need 200mm, the 200mm f/2.8L II is also an excellent lens, and a great value.

[DSLR_Newbie]

If 200mm is as long as you need/want,

Thanks for the reply.
Range over 200mm should be fine as long as it does not degrades image quality for the extra reach.

[neuroanatomist]

The problem is getting over 200mm will exceed your budget, at least for a new lens (the exception being a 200mm f/2.8L II plus a 2x TC, which is optically not as good, although still likely more than a match for your 18-200mm).

However, if you're willing to buy used, you can likely find 100-400L within your budget - and it's a great lens, although not quite as good optically as the 70-200/4L IS (really, the differences are minor, and that lens at 400mm will be a lot better than a shot at 200mm cropped to the 400mm FoV.

[DavidEccleston]

Where would you be ordering from? From what I understand, $1200 doesn't go very far in Australia.

I'm assuming you want the versatility of a zoom, so a sharp prime like the 135mm f/2, or 200mm f/2.8 are out. Both would be super sharp, work in dim lighting, give you access the the high precision f/2.8 focus points, and fit in your budget. Only you know if they'd fit your shooting style.

I'd ask if you felt you needed the full 200mm, but once you choose a telephoto zoom, that's pretty much the short end. I think the 18-200mm is one of the optically better non-L lenses, so I don't think you want any of the non-Ls. That brings us to the cheapest L telephoto zooms.

Based on US pricing:
The 70-200mm f/4L (non IS) should be well within your budget. Not quite as sharp as the IS version. Not sure how it compares to the 18-200mm. At the very least it should focus better and faster, and is a bit of a faster lens. This might be the only thing in budget at Aussie retail pricing.

The 70-200mm f/4L IS is within your budget based on US pricing, and is nice and sharp in addition the the focus and aperture bonuses the non-IS had.

The 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS is just out of budget based on US pricing (Grey market is like $1240). If you find 200mm a bit short for your needs, maybe you'll want to save for that instead. It's a super-sharp fantasic lens. I've posted before about how the variable aperture doesn't matter much. It's only a full stop slower well past 200mm. You'd be 2/3s of a stop slower on the last 45mm (f/5.0 from 155-225mm), but if you're spending a lot of time at or near 200mm, you might prefer going to 300mm over the f/4 vs. f/5 difference.

Don't forget the used market! If you weren't completely invested in EF-S glass, I'd say look for a used 5D mk 1 (They were going for $500 over the summer) as an alternative option. I love my used full frame (1Ds mk II). The 7D doesn't get out much these days.

[DSLR_Newbie]

Thanks for the reply. there are quite a few options contrary to what i assumed.

Where would you be ordering from? From what I understand, $1200 doesn't go very far in Australia.

I can't buy S*** even if wanted to when buying Retail in Australia. I use DWI Camera based out of HongKong (Grey Imports)

The 70-200mm F4 L IS costs around $1050 (Retail $1500).
The 70-300 L also falls within the range as it it costs around $1170 (Retail : $1700)

[thekingb]

The 70-200 f/L IS or, of you can stretch it, the 70-300L. Both are optically excellent. The 70-200 has the edge in size, weight and aperture through 200mm. But it's not contest from 201-300mm

I've owned both. Sold the 70-200 for the 70-300 for the extra reach. For my purposes, I've never looked back. I love love the 70-300L.

[neuroanatomist]

Given that the 70-300L is in your budget, I'd recommend that over the 70-200/4L IS...

[Dave Throgmartin]

70-200 f/4 L USM is an excellent lens. Test charts are test charts, but in practice using my 60D I can't tell much difference between that lens used at f/4 or the 135L used at f/4.

Plus, it is relatively cheap! I picked up mine for $559 USD about a month ago.

I rented the 70-300L once and thought it was a great lens although a lot more expensive. It's very sharp, has a great range, and has a 4-stop stabilizer.

Dave