Lens upgrade really worthwhile?

C

Cobbler72

Suspended / Banned
Messages
46
Edit My Images
No
I have been considering upgrading a lens for some time. I have a Canon 350D and Canon lenses,

18-55mm f3.5 / 5.6
75-300mm f4 / 5.6

Advice on here ages ago suggested I go for a

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens

Just before I take the plunge, will I notice the difference or am I wasting my money? I just want some reassurance before splashing out £500.
 
Yes, better lenses generally take technically better pictures IMVHO.

You might have to look closely to see the difference but if you want to look closely I'm pretty sure that the differences will be there to be seen.

What is better though? Personally I think I'd place features such as a wide aperture, USM/HSM, full time manual focus, IS, bokeh shape and size and weight at least as high and possibly higher than other things such as ultimate sharpness, resistance to flare or contrast or colour considerations.
 
I am really after sharpeness and I have read great things about this lens. I can't afford IS so continue to wonder if buying this will just be duplicating what I already have or will be something that I can get excited by its results in a like for like situation.

My current lenses seem very soft to me, especially the 18-55.
 
It's a brilliant lens ( not lens) that will never disappoint you, but if the kit lens is the real problem upgrade that to a Tamron 17-50 instead.
 
Last edited:
You will notice a big difference I had the 75-300 and it was ok but the 70-200 is in a different league, colours have better saturation the focussing is instant and silent and picture quality excellent (you may gather that I.m rather fond of my lens) The build quality and constant aperture are also good features.
I do have the IS model but to be honest at this range its not too much of an issue and only tend to use it if I need to push the speed a bit low.

Buy it you won't be disappointed.:thumbs:

Rob
 
Cobbler72 said:
I am really after sharpeness and I have read great things about this lens. I can't afford IS so continue to wonder if buying this will just be duplicating what I already have or will be something that I can get excited by its results in a like for like situation.

My current lenses seem very soft to me, especially the 18-55.
Click to expand...

Which lens do you use the most? If it is the 18-55 then I can recommend the Sigma 18-50 F2.8 EX DG MACRO. I find this lens super-sharp and it has the added benefit of F2.8
 
I used to have the 350D and 18-55 just like you. When I got my 70-200 F4 it just blew me away on how much sharper etc all the shots were.

Plus it will be just as good when you upgrade your body in the future.
 
DaveKing said:
Which lens do you use the most? If it is the 18-55 then I can recommend the Sigma 18-50 F2.8 EX DG MACRO. I find this lens super-sharp and it has the added benefit of F2.8
Click to expand...

Just looked at a review of the Sigma and it says very good lens marred by chromatic aberration. Have you noticed this?
 
My biggest issue with Sigma lenses is their poor quality control - it's a lottery whether you get a good one. I've had two and had problems with both. You can't go wrong with the 70-200 but, if you're looking to upgrade the kit lens then I'd go with the Tamron mentioned or the Canon 17-55 if you can stretch to it.
 
Vertigo1 said:
My biggest issue with Sigma lenses is their poor quality control - it's a lottery whether you get a good one. I've had two and had problems with both. You can't go wrong with the 70-200 but, if you're looking to upgrade the kit lens then I'd go with the Tamron mentioned or the Canon 17-55 if you can stretch to it.
Click to expand...

I got a 2nd hand Tamron and it was no better than the Canon 18-55mm kit lens. Bad example of the breed, I guess.
 
It seems like I will see the difference with the regularly recommended Canon 70-200mm f4 L lens then - thanks for you comments.

On the wider lens - I have already more or less decided on the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 too for later in the year when funds allow.

Is this still a good lens despite what the previous poster commented? I have been debating Tamron v Sigma and have come down on the Tamron side unless you folk know better?
 
ashaz said:
Just looked at a review of the Sigma and it says very good lens marred by chromatic aberration. Have you noticed this?
Click to expand...

CA is trivial to remove. I'd be concerned about other issues like centering defects that are specific to particular samples rather that the design of the lens.

If you are buying one used better find somebody upgrading to FF (as opposed to dumping the lens for something sharper for crop) and give it a vey good all-round test.

The bottom line is that if it doesn't look perfect it probably isn't - apart from user mistakes.
 
daugirdas said:
CA is trivial to remove.
Click to expand...

I wish.

Not always...

Dunno if it's lens or camera dependant but moving the sliders in CS5 made zero difference to some shots I was processing recently. Zero.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top