Purchased the Canon 28-200mm recently, but unimpressed.

K

kasabian

Suspended / Banned
Messages
21
Edit My Images
No
Hello again, everybody :wave:

Well, the title says it all really. Last week I purchased the Canon EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 for my Canon 1000D. Up until that point I'd only ever used my kit lens (18-55mm).

I, as always spent a lot of time reading online reviews before purchasing. It generally seemed to be a lens that was pretty highly recommended, and the price was good too.

But I'm just not that impressed with it. The results are soft looking, not as sharp as my 18-55. Perhaps this is to do with not having IS on the 28-200mm. I don't know. :shrug:

And to be honest, I don't even think I need a 200mm zoom lens. Prior to purchase, I was excited about being able have a such a zoom capability. But now I just feel like one of those women who have huge, off-road 4x4 vehicles, and just drive them around in the city. :whistling:

I think I'm going to sell it on Ebay and get something else. :|

I was just wondering if there's anything you could recommend as a good everyday lens to have on my camera. (£200-£300 price range). Something with a bit of a bigger reach than my 18-55. Maximum of up to a 135mm perhaps, not more. Something that has a decent reach, but doesn't compromise on sharpness/image quality....if that's possible within my price target.

Sorry for all the questions. I'm always reading lens reviews on Amazon, but they always seem to be inconsistent. One person loves a particular lens, another person hates it. Seems like the only place I'm going to get a good honest reply, is here.

Thanks very much in advance.
 
Last edited:
Hi,

A recommended lens to partner the 18-55 is the 55-250 ef-s IS.

I know this is well beyond your maximum 135mm, but the lens itself isn't too large and slightly better built than the kit lens. These can be had for around £120 second hand upto £220apprx new from the highstreet.

If you don't think it is a pain to carry the 18-55 in your pocket/bag - you got a very good value for money setup there by keeping the 55-250 on the camera. It also has image stabilisation.

If that sounds like an option....I'll dig out some reviews or you can have a google if you prefer, or listen to what users on here have to say:thumbs:

Andy
 
Thanks Andy :thankyou:

Yea, I think I'm going to have to accept that there's no such thing as a flawless 'All in One' type lens that does everything perfectly. Not in my price range anyway.

I was looking at the Canon 28-135mm and the 17-85mm, but judging by the reviews, even those are a bit "ehhhh". :suspect:

The 55-250 you mentioned seems like the best option. Great price too. I had seen it numerous times before, but like you mentioned, was never too keen on carrying lenses around with me and chopping and changing all the time. But I'm going to be getting a wide angle lens soon too, so I'd better get used to the idea of carrying lenses around with me. It'll be fine. :) :eek:
 
Last edited:
kasabian said:
......Last week I purchased the Canon EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 for my Canon 1000D. Up until that point I'd only ever used my kit lens (18-55mm).

I, as always spent a lot of time reading online reviews before purchasing. It generally seemed to be a lens that was pretty highly recommended, and the price was good too.

But I'm just not that impressed with it. The results are soft looking, not as sharp as my 18-55. Perhaps this is to do with not having IS on the 28-200mm. I don't know. :shrug:
Click to expand...


http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=11&sort=7&cat=27&page=2
It comes 6th from bottom out of 38 Canon zoom lenses, with an average of 6.4 out of 14 reviews. I'd say that wasn't the best lens out there.
You'd be much better selling or returning the lens (is returning an option?) and saving up for a 70-200 f/4 L, if sharpness is your goal. You should be able to get one for around £425.
 
I think too many people expect to be able to use an "all in one" lens in exactly the same way as the basic kit lens.

That 'aint so ! Regrettably many of these also don't have the basic photographic knowledge to adjust their camera and/or technique to suit the new lens.

You don't drive a DB9 the same way as you drive your Focus - if you do, you soon end up in the ditch !
 
Last edited:
kasabian said:
Thanks Andy :thankyou:

Yea, I think I'm going to have to accept that there's no such thing as a flawless 'All in One' type lens that does everything perfectly. Not in my price range anyway.

I was looking at the Canon 28-135mm and the 17-85mm, but judging by the reviews, even those are a bit "ehhhh". :suspect:

The 55-250 you mentioned seems like the best option. Great price too. I had seen it numerous times before, but like you mentioned, was never too keen on carrying lenses around with me and chopping and changing all the time. But I'm going to be getting a wide angle lens soon too, so I'd better get used to the idea of carrying lenses around with me. It'll be fine. :) :eek:
Click to expand...


Yeah..I've been slowly building up lenses, since added a 50mm, a macro and a ultra wide angle.

I think if you get a great lens, whatever the focal length from 10mm to 400mm, prime or zoom, you will use it and/or won't mind carrying at least one additional quality lens. I was out with the new UWA angle today and wish I had taken the macro along:bonk:

Any lens that is soft or just not great to use will ultimately disappoint you and probably put you off that focal length.

Here are some reviews using the same site mentioned earlier;
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=362&sort=4&cat=27&page=1.

If you could stretch to a 70-200 f4 as mentioned, thats a better lens although doesn't have IS and is 2-3x the price, if you wanted IS then you can double that price again :eek:
 
TBH I don't know what you expected...
If a 28-200 was even half as good as a 24-70 and 70-200 (each costing in excess of £1k), do you imagine they'd sell any of those?
 
kasabian said:
Thanks Andy :thankyou:

Yea, I think I'm going to have to accept that there's no such thing as a flawless 'All in One' type lens that does everything perfectly. Not in my price range anyway.
Click to expand...

To be honest, not in anyone's price range. It just doesn't exist.
 
dentedshed said:
The Canon 28-200mm is the worst Canon lens I have ever had the misfortune to own. I owned it for the best part of four hours and it still gives me nightmares.
Click to expand...

Now there's a recommendation for you...:lol:
 
As above the 70-200 is a cracker. Depending on budget the 55-250 is very good and I had the 28-135IS you mentioned and was very pleased with the lens and the results.
 
If you only want a lens up to 135mm, and one lens to do everything, I'd recommend the Canon 18-135 IS. I use one as my walkabout / everyday lens and for this its cracking. Sharp and great IS and within your budget. A bit of barrel distortion at 18mm (as with most 'superzooms') but that can be corrected in PP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top