Telephoto to complement EF-S 17-55mm f2.8

[sheltie_prince]

Hi all,

I am just doing a research what is the next lens I should consider incorporating to my system for the range >55mm

Anybody knows if Canon is going to release a 55 - xxxmm EF-S lens? to complement the EF-S 17-55mm f2.8?

Or is the next best lens to consider is the 70-200mm f4 L? keke

Hope to hear your comments.

[adamadam]

Originally Posted by sheltie_prince Hi all, I am just doing a research what is the next lens I should consider incorporating to my system for the range >55mm Anybody knows if Canon is going to release a 55 - xxxmm EF-S lens? to complement the EF-S 17-55mm f2.8? Or is the next best lens to consider is the 70-200mm f4 L? keke Hope to hear your comments.

Depends on what you need, but the 70-200 f/2.8L IS is a nice choice!

[l_n_h]

Originally Posted by sheltie_prince Hi all, I am just doing a research what is the next lens I should consider incorporating to my system for the range >55mm Anybody knows if Canon is going to release a 55 - xxxmm EF-S lens? to complement the EF-S 17-55mm f2.8? Or is the next best lens to consider is the 70-200mm f4 L? keke Hope to hear your comments.

i got a sigma 50-150mm f2.8 to complement my ef-s 17-55mm f2.8

[varf]

canon does have a consumer-grade 55-200 lens. haven't heard much about it? no surprise there

i'd say go for the 70-200/* range.

[the6thday]

Originally Posted by adamadam Depends on what you need, but the 70-200 f/2.8L IS is a nice choice!

yeah yeah! IS. for a lens in this range, IS makes all the difference if you are going to handhold shots. no point saving the $$$ and not getting the shots. then you would have wasted the money on a product that only gets you halfway there.

the gap from 55 to 70 is really marginal. it just means that you have take one or two steps closer to the subject.

[user111]

70-200/2.8L(non IS, for lower cost) with 2x tc (kenko pro series, for lower cost)

no doubt lack of IS but gives u two things:

- f2.8 for low light and nice DOF up to 200mm
- an affordable 400mm maximum focal length to experiment with.

[sheltie_prince]

Thanks guys...

My exact sentiments on jumping to 70-xxx instead of looking for a 50 / 55mm - xxxxmm

I have reservations on going third party for telephoto lens in that range as I think a lens with IS is a huge benefit.

SO looks like there is no news on Canon developing an EF-S lens beginning from 55mm ?

[Russ]

Yup the gap is no issue

I know a pro who uses a 16-35 (on a 1DII) znd a 135mm.
Ken Rockwell tends to do that too

I have actually done long trips with a 10-22 and a 50mm or 85mm.

If I were you, I would get a 70-200 F4 L or a 85mm prime (much lighter and F1.8) unless you really need to long end, in which case the 135/2 is also good.

[thw]

Originally Posted by l_n_h i got a sigma 50-150mm f2.8 to complement my ef-s 17-55mm f2.8

Can you tell us about its AF accuracy and sharpness at f/2.8? Thanks.

[raptor84]

For my budget I got he 70-200 f/4 with no regrets

[archlover]

i second 135L...
i always bring 2 lenses, 10-22 and 135..

[J-Chan]

Canon should release a EF-S 50-150 2.8 IS, and make it much lighter/smaller than the 70-200 Ls.. now thats a telephoto to complement the 17-55..

but if I were to choose, its probably the new 70-200 F4 IS

[sheltie_prince]

yup i do share J-chan's view.. but an EF-S 50-135mm f2.8 IS would be more than good enough to me.. hahhah

I too am inclined to the 70-200 f4 L...

[FilterFunk]

if you get the F4L.. you dont have an option to pair it with a TC.. hmm.

[sheltie_prince]

true.. but not really essential as I don't think I would need it...

Looking at the weight difference between the 70-200mm f2.8 IS L and f4L would be 1,470grams 710grams respectively, so 710grams difference...

Price wise would be the former costing approx. 40% more than the f4L....

In terms of image quality... is the 40% difference worth it?

Cheers!

[LowLights]

Originally Posted by sheltie_prince true.. but not really essential as I don't think I would need it... Looking at the weight difference between the 70-200mm f2.8L and f4L would be 1310grams 710grams respectively, so 600grams difference... Price wise would be the former costing approx. 40% more than the f4L.... In terms of image quality... is the 40% difference worth it? Cheers!

Bro,

The 70-200 f2.8 IS is IMO worth every penny, Image and Build

Agreed that the weight is an issue, but with IS and f2.8, indoor concert handheld shots not a problem (of course after that arms, wrist all damn sore )

Maybe you want to consider the 135 f/2.. also another solid lens. With f/2 can stop frame without flash , but need to pump up the ISO, 80% success rate .

But if money no problem, may I suggest the 85 f/1.2 . This would lens is another beauty... no chance to try one yet but from pic I saw and all the kopitam talk, this is a keeper.

Bro, you have me contact, if you want to try the 70-200 and the 135, let's get together for coffee

[sheltie_prince]

Yo brother.. rare seeing you at this hour... enjoying your 5D?

Hhmmm... I don't like talking to you... you only add "ideas" to my dilemma.

The exact same reason why I am asking about this is because of you lah.. talk about kids concert etc.. so thought of doing some research.. byo.. then hoot when money enough. hahahaaha

Found this thread which I think also have some good feedbacks between f2.8 vs f4.
http://forum.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=227442

U just bought the 135mm f2?????

[LowLights]

Originally Posted by sheltie_prince Yo brother.. rare seeing you at this hour... enjoying your 5D? Hhmmm... I don't like talking to you... you only add "ideas" to my dilemma. The exact same reason why I am asking about this is because of you lah.. talk about kids concert etc.. so thought of doing some research.. byo.. then hoot when money enough. hahahaaha Found this thread which I think also have some good feedbacks between f2.8 vs f4. http://forum.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=227442 U just bought the 135mm f2?????

Yup you bet !! Shoots anything that moves

LOL... did not know I made so a big impact, Hey CANON want to employ me for Marketing

Yup got the 135 just early this week. Interested want to buy ?? Sell U good price !!

Yup read that Thread.. USM was spot on. So I stay at side line lor...

The 70-200 f/4 is damn tempting for it's cost, size, weight. But for a lens of this zoom, to handheld and shoot in 200 under indoor concert or moderately lite environment, you need to use a tripod, unless you are damn steady, but trust me .. still have shake, even for the 70-200 f/2.8 non IS. But being a 2.8 it will make up for faster shutter speed, but not the shake. To really have shakeless shot handheld, we need good daylight or brightly lit indoor lighting.
Flash can help, but most of the time, we might not be close enough for the flash to help..

Think about it, got to worry about shake and concentrate on the action of the moments. Bro, like that where got fun.

Honestly even using the IS model, you be surprise that you lose some shots to shakes when Handheld..(rare but happens)
Maybe it's just me only

Hope I made you more confuse... LOL

[l_n_h]

Originally Posted by thw Can you tell us about its AF accuracy and sharpness at f/2.8? Thanks.

in terms of AF accuracy, my lens front focus a lot initally. after calibration, it is much much better. at f2.8, it is still not very sharp. but by f4 it is better.

[95bcwh]

EP-S 17-55mm f/2.8 owners, sorry to sidetrack this thread a little, can I ask you guys if you have any dust issue with this lens?


Thanks
barry