topic Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM in EF & RF Lenses

EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

nativetxn73 — Sat, 13 Jul 2013 00:56:29 GMT

Hi. I am considering purchasing either the Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM lens or the Sigma 50-500mm F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM lens.

I'm looking for anyone that can tell me more about either of these lenses & their own personal experience with them.

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

cicopo — Sat, 13 Jul 2013 02:34:18 GMT

What do you intend to use them for? Also what body will you use? I DO own the 28-300 L IS & use it a lot, and DID own the NON OS version of the Saigma 50-500 so do have some thoughts that might relate to the OS version even though it's new & improved. I shoot Radio Control events so my needs are fast AF and a big range from wide to long if possible but I also need to do my thing hand held for several hours without a break. The Canon 35-350 L (long go discontinued), 28-300 L IS & 100-400 L IS meet my needs and there's a chance the 70-200 f 2.8 L's & a TC might too but the Sigma 80-400 OS & the 50-500 NON OS couldn't track the planes well enough primarily due to them NOT having a focus limiter switch. They were however sharp enough to take similar enough photos that in my personal testing met my requirements for any lens.

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

nativetxn73 — Sat, 13 Jul 2013 05:07:44 GMT

I have a Canon t3i, but hope to upgrade in the future. I am fairly new to photography and am looking for an all purpose lens. I have the 18-55mm kit lens & have used a Canon 70-300mm lens, but I feel that they are a bit limiting. At this point, I am not very comfortable changing lenses for different needs while out shooting. My interest is in nature & wildlife photography.

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

cicopo — Sun, 14 Jul 2013 01:03:30 GMT

When it comes to wildlife we never seem to have a long enough lens so if that's your prime interest I'd recommend the Sigma 50-500 over any xx-300 because 300 is not long enough. That said both the Sigma & the 28-300 L IS are HEAVY as walk around or hiking lenses. If you intend to stay with crop bodies (prefered for wildlife because of the artificial reach advantage) I'm goint to recommend that you consider a lighter superzoom like the Tamron 18-270 VC as your walkaround lens and if your budget allows maybe add the 50-500 for your wildlife shooting BUT it's not the greatest for birds in flight (due to slow AF compared to Canon 400 f5.6 or 100-400 L IS). You could also consider the 100-400 L IS as a very useful wildlife lens but it is shorter than the Sigma and there are times you'll miss that extra 100 mm's.

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

Lenarufus — Thu, 18 Jul 2013 01:12:57 GMT

Can you tell me why you find the 70-300 lens limiting? I'm thinking of getting one for my 40D, the f4-5.6. I would sell my 17-55 and 85 f1.8 lenses and use my fuji x100 23mm camera for carrying around everyday and add the 40D and 70-300 when traveling.

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

Bill-Emmett — Fri, 19 Jul 2013 22:57:28 GMT

I've been in same delema. First off, the Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM is the lens for you for shooting wildlife. You can match it with a tele-extender and get wonderful photos at quite a range. It also focuses fast, which I'm afraid your 40D will not be able to keep up with. When shooting wildlife you will want to shoot lots of frames per second, and have a fast focus body, like the Canon EOS 7D, or possibly the new 70D. I would look at Adorama, they are now having a sale on the refurbished 7D, and could possibly set you up on a used 100-400mm L lens. Keep in mind when you mention wildlife, you start talking about expensive.

B-E

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

nativetxn73 — Sat, 20 Jul 2013 22:14:36 GMT

I feel like the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM I have been using
doesn't zoom far enough for my particular photography interest. I am looking for more flexibility options when shooting wildlife, etc. Plus, I would like a lens that has a bit wider angle option than 70mm. Also,as I mentioned in my original post, I am not real comfortable changing out my lenses frequently since I am new to photography. I want an all purpose lens.

70-300 IS USM

Lenarufus — Sun, 21 Jul 2013 00:16:54 GMT

Well I'll know soon if the 70-300 is what I want - as i have just ordered one, only $366 with a $20 generic lens hood and free delivery so not too much to lose. I don't want it for wildlife, just as a longer lens on my 40D to take traveling to go with the Fuji X100 (since I got it I have been using the 40d less and less) and this might make a good combination - will leave my 17-55 and 85mm lenses at home. Only trouble is I have to wait 2 weeks to get it!
Edit - this is the cheaper lens, not the DO one

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

teammt — Fri, 06 Sep 2013 16:24:28 GMT

I am also considering the 28-300 for a 5D III that I will be purchaisng. I have driven my self crazy comparing lenes and considering the draw backs to having a super zoom. I have a 7D that I can use with a TC and 70-300 IS USM lens for reach. Any thoughs on on the 28-300 as a walk around besides it being heavy?

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

cicopo — Fri, 06 Sep 2013 21:53:21 GMT

It's both heavy & a bit bulky but the other thing to know about it is that it gets noticed. If you're trying to blend in while shooting general stuff it's a bit hard thanks to the while color & physical size. I used mine as my walk about lens last vacation mounted to a 1D4 with great results but it got heavy on long walks & I have a wide & comfortable strap which I wear across my chest / back & not hanging from my neck. .

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

RobKillen — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 08:42:16 GMT

Hi Cicopo.

The Sigma 50-500mm is appealing to me a generic walkabout lens. This is because I walk around twons and cities and then often find myself with a need to reach into more distant objects (recent trip to Florence proved the point). My current lenses run 17-35, 100mm, 70-200 and 150-600mm but I feel the Sigma might just cover all of my options.

Is the lens reasonably portable? Is a tripod mandatory for its use?

Thanks.

Regards,

Rob.

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

ebiggs1 — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 10:29:20 GMT

I have the Sigma 150-500mm which is an older version of the newer 50-500mm Siggy.

"Is the lens reasonably portable?" No, it is not. It is big. Remember it has a 10:1 zoom ratio. So it is going to be big and its IQ is a understandable compromise. Is a tripod mandatory for its use?

Is a tripod mandatory for its use? As can be expected for a lens with a 450-500mm focal length available. Yes I know it is designated 500mm, but that focal length seems overstated to me. 450-470mm or so looks about right. The Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX DG HSM Lens is not small or light. It has even acquired a nickname - "Bigma". You can carry this lens all day. You will know you did. It is not too heavy to handhold, but a support would be welcome if you intend to have it in shooting position for long periods of time.

I believe the SIgma "Bigma" has been discontinued . You will have to find one or get a used one. Why not check out the new Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens. It is head and shoulders better.

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

RobKillen — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 11:08:07 GMT

Thank you, E Biggs, for your detailed response. It's very useful.

Currently I have a 16-35, 100, 70-200 and a 150-600. What I'm looking for is something that's reasonably wide but also has the 40-70 range and then out to say 350-400 - which I can use as a general purpose lens. Weight isn't an issue for me and I have an excellent tripod as well as a modets monopod.

You can still get the 50-500mm here in the UK, new and it's heavily discounted - down to around £500.00 now.

When out roaming, I want to cut down lens changes in poor weather, sandy beach areas and spontaneous hikes, walks and tours.

Any further advice or insight would be much appreciated.

Regards, thanks.

Rob.

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

ebiggs1 — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 14:55:23 GMT

Rob,

Again remember I have the 150-500mm version. But like I said the two lenses are nearly identical except for the extra 100mm on the short end. Mine is also the brand-N mount. the one you want is the Sigma 50-500mm f/4.5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM Lens model.

Sigma made two models one has OS and one doesn't. You will need the OS which is Sigma version of image stabilization. Actually it works very well. I have a photo from my normal set up for shooting birds. Unfortunately there wasn't any birds around at the time. It will give you an idea of what you can expect from yours. This is from a 12mp camera on a tripod.

I wouldn't consider it as, my, general walk around lens but I suppose it will certainly work. It is not weather proof at all.

IMHO, it is a very good lens especially for the money. However, it is not a great lens. I have had two of them. One in each mount. I didn't keep the Canon mount because I have more better Canon lenses. I have the Nikkor 200-500mm lens and the Siggy is way better than Nikon's entry in this catagory. I would pick the Siggy every time over the Nikkor.

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

RobKillen — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 16:30:19 GMT

Hi EBiggs1.

Thanks, again, for the great response - it is much appreciated.

Currently doing the rounds and having something a negoti-auction with a few suppliers - we'll see what happens.

That picture is useful too - the idea that I can get along the Jurassic coast here, take in some landscapes and then close in on formations, birds, ships and whatever in the region, is highly attractive.

Again, thank you.

Regards

Rob.

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

cicopo — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 17:36:42 GMT

I had the original 50-500 (non OS version) and it was a pretty good lens but not for hand holding when used in the longer end. it gewts heavy rather quickly. IQ was good but AF was a bit slow for fast paced action, which became what I shoot most of the time these days. It was fine for wildlife but I doubt it would be very good for birds in flight untess they are large.

Re: EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

teammt — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 15:04:12 GMT

i had the same question. After some very helpfull posts from other fourm members I went with the 24-105L and the 100-400L. This works best as the walk around lens is lighter. I have recently added the the 11 - 24 f4.