Help With Canon Lens Choice

[mikec826]

I'm about to order the Canon 5d DSLR with the 28-105 L lens (it comes as a kit). I'd also like to get a longer zoom lens and can'd decide between the following 3 lenses:
EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM
EF 70-300 f/4.5 DO IS USM; and
EF 100-400 f/4.5 L IS USM

I'll be using the longer zoom lens while traveling (on and off the bike) shooting nature, landscapes, wildlife and anything else of interest. My first trip will be in September on the bike in Arizona.

Any suggestions as to which lens to get? Thanks a lot.

[Randy]

I'm about to order the Canon 5d DSLR with the 28-105 L lens (it comes as a kit). I'd also like to get a longer zoom lens and can'd decide between the following 3 lenses:
EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM
EF 70-300 f/4.5 DO IS USM; and
EF 100-400 f/4.5 L IS USM

I'll be using the longer zoom lens while traveling (on and off the bike) shooting nature, landscapes, wildlife and anything else of interest. My first trip will be in September on the bike in Arizona.

Any suggestions as to which lens to get? Thanks a lot.The 70-200 is arguably the best zoom Canon has in its lineup. It is a very fast and sharp lens. I am not sure you will get enough reach with it on the full frame sensor of the 5D. The 70-300 is a very nice and compact lens, but it will not match the sharpness and contrast of the 100-400L. I have all three lenses and currently have my 70-300 listed on Ebay. I was never really as happy with it as my other lenses in that range.

If I was going to just buy one, the 100-400 would be it. It is a big lens and a little heavy, but it is a very good performer. For a zoom it gives very good sharpness at 400mm and it is reasonably fast.

The 28-105 is a very good lens for general use. The 100-400 would give3 you a total focal length range of 28-400 with no gaps. You can also use the 1.4X converter on the 400 with reasonably good results. I would avoid the 2X converter. I currently keep the 28-300L IS mounted on my camera most of the time, but it is an expensive lens. The two lens combo above would cover more range, for less money than the 28-300 and the 28-105 is about a half-stop faster.

The 70-200 would be a great lens to add at a later date, if you find you want the speed.

If you look at this index (http://www.prades.net/alaska2007/day22/HTML/index.htm) the first few bear pictures were with the 28-300, beginning with the 5th image I switched to the 100-400. There is some motion blur in some of those images, but that is operator error rather than equipment problems. The bears were about 100 yards away. Under all of the images in my indexes I show the EXIF data which will tell you the lens I was using.

[Lonewuff]

+1 on the 70 - 200 and you will love the lower F stop...believe me!!!

[kdog]

I think you guys are talking about the 24-105L (not 28-105). If you want to shoot wildlife, my advice is to go with the 100-400L. 200mm is really too short to shoot wildlife in the wild. Although the 70-200 F2.8 would make an awesome zoo lens because the lighting is usually so bad in zoos. Sure, you could use a TC1.4 on the 70-200, but you're still not at 400mm, plus you'll lose image quality. The TC2x would degrade IQ even further on the zoom. The IS on the 100-400 works wonders.

Here's a zoo shot at 1/50s, 120mm, hand held.
http://www.jacara.com/cpg144/albums/zoo/IMG_5512.jpg

A bunch more zoo shots here: http://www.jacara.com/cpg144/thumbnails.php?album=11

If you want to see how the 100-400 performs in the wild (as opposed to the zoo), you could check out my nature galleries here. http://www.jacara.com/cpg144/index.php?cat=4

You can get full EXIF data while you're perusing the images by just clicking on the 'i' at the top of the page. It's sticky, so by clicking it once, you'll have enabled the exif info on all the images. It shows up below the image, so be sure to scroll down.

HTH,
-joel

[Randy]

I think you guys are talking about the 24-105L (not 28-105). HTH,
-joel

You are correct, the kit lens with a 5D is a 24-105L f/4.0 IS and that is the lens I have as well. Canon does make an EF 28-105.

http://www.prades.net/zoo2003/493t0259_std.jpg

[kdog]

Nice shot, Randy. Very cute pose on that goat.

-joel

[Randy]

Nice shot, Randy. Very cute pose on that goat.

-joelThank you. Sometimes I know just how it feels ;

[mikec826]

Thank you all very much! I hope I can one day take shots as well as you guys.

Randy, would you mind explaining, "I am not sure you will get enough reach with it on the full frame sensor of the 5D" a little more to me? I'm not quite sure I know what you mean by "reach". Thanks again.

[kdog]

Thank you all very much! I hope I can one day take shots as well as you guys.

Randy, would you mind explaining, "I am not sure you will get enough reach with it on the full frame sensor of the 5D" a little more to me? I'm not quite sure I know what you mean by "reach". Thanks again.

I ain't Randy, but when nature photographers talk about "reach", you can pretty much substitute the word "magnification" for it. There are full frame sensors and crop frame sensors. My 20D is a 1.6 crop frame, and that gives me the illusion of having a built-in 1.6x magnifier on it as compared to a full frame. My use of the word "illusion" is a political move because some folks will debate whether it's a true 1.6 magnification, or the illusion of having it because it's essentially cropping the photo. I don't care to join that debate. Suffice simply to say that a 400 lens on a full-frame camera is a wider shot than on a crop-sensor camera like mine. I'd also say that pixels on a full-frame camera like yours are larger and higher quality than on a crop frame. Life's full of little tradeoffs like that. One thing that most folks will agree though is that when it comes to wildlife, the more reach the better.

Cheers,
-joel

[Randy]

I ain't Randy, but when nature photographers talk about "reach", you can pretty much substitute the word "magnification" for it. There are full frame sensors and crop frame sensors. My 20D is a 1.6 crop frame, and that gives me the illusion of having a built-in 1.6x magnifier on it as compared to a full frame. My use of the word "illusion" is a political move because some folks will debate whether it's a true 1.6 magnification, or the illusion of having it because it's essentially cropping the photo. I don't care to join that debate. Suffice simply to say that a 400 lens on a full-frame camera is a wider shot than on a crop-sensor camera like mine. I'd also say that pixels on a full-frame camera like yours are larger and higher quality than on a crop frame. Life's full of little tradeoffs like that. One thing that most folks will agree though is that when it comes to wildlife, the more reach the better.

Cheers,
-joelWhat Joel said ;)

I absolutely love a full frame sensor, but an object centered in the frame with a 200mm lens mounted on a 20D (or 10D, 30D, 300xt, etc.) will fill more of the frame than that same object in a 300mm lens on a 5D (or 1Ds, 1DsMkII). Of course it is further complicated by the 1D (1DMkII, 1DMkIII) which falls in between with less of a crop factor, somewhere between 1.25 and 1.3.

So far all Nikon DSLRs use 1.5 crop factor.

Here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_factor) is a Wikipedia description of crop factor.

Here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format) is a Wikipedia listing of the sensor formats currently employed by most camera manufacturers.

[mikec826]

Thanks Randy and Joel! That helps a lot. So I'll order the 5d with the 24-105 lens kit and the 100-400L IS lens.

Now, can you render more sage advice to help me deal with my lovely wife over this purchase?

[OKUIII]

Hey Mike know how you feel. I had been used to Canon products but purchased a new Nikon D80. The first lens I got was the one that comes with the D40: AF-S DX 18-55mm f3.5 - 5.6 ED II. I bough a longer lens after that: AF-S DX VR Zoom 19-200mm f3.5 - 5.6G IF-ED.

Like you, I had to do some good explaining to the better half!

[mikec826]

Alright then O.K., I'll use you as a reference with her!

[kdog]

Thanks Randy and Joel! That helps a lot. So I'll order the 5d with the 24-105 lens kit and the 100-400L IS lens.

Now, can you render more sage advice to help me deal with my lovely wife over this purchase?

Congrats. That's going to be an awesome setup.

And believe me, I'm empathetic to the spousal problem. I've already spent several thousand on gear, and my wife knows full well that I've only scratched the surface. There will be bigger lenses, pro bodies, etc. The tripod set up I have in mind alone will run me about $2K. Then on top of that will come the trips to BC, Alaska, Africa and other places to chase wildlife around. That's when it starts getting really expensive. Oh well, at least she makes plenty of money to pay for it all. :histerica

-joel

[Randy]

Now, can you render more sage advice to help me deal with my lovely wife over this purchase?I am glad you got other responses. In my household we both have indulgences and try to keep them relatively equal.

[BobW]

That combo (24-105L and 100-400) will be a great setup. I have a 30D with both of those lenses and I can't believe how good they are. The 100-400 has amazing clarity even hand held. It is kind of hefty but sometimes I use a monopod; however, even handheld it is very clear.

[mefly2]

Erg ... my favorite is 70-200 initially ... (because of the lens speed for lower illumination ... stretching the day) ... add a WA and TC as funds are available ... never regretted it in several different kits ... however, some prefer more tele ... to each his (her) own ... $.02

[scottydawg]

Erg ... my favorite is 70-200 initially ... (because of the lens speed for lower illumination ... stretching the day) ... add a WA and TC as funds are available ... never regretted it in several different kits ... however, some prefer more tele ... to each his (her) own ... $.02

For the people that can't understand what alien language this is...
I think he's saying that he likes the 70-200 2.8 for it's good low light speed, he suggest you add a Wide Angle and a Tele Converter when you have money... not sure about the rest :confused:

Sorry to give you a hard time mefly but I'm not sure everyone reading this forum knows the "lingo".

[mikec826]

Thanks Scott!!! And you too Mefly2!