Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Travel And Spotting Lens  
User currently offlineLH234 From Germany, joined May 2009, 13 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4689 times:

Hey guys,

I'm currently spotting with my 100-400 lens but I happens way too often that 100mm are to much!
This is why I wanted to expand my equipment.

I was looking at three different lenses:

Canon 24-105L > is very expensive,but worth the money?
Canon 17-85 IS USM > I heard that this one has some problems at 17mm and the colors are not that good
Canon 18-200 IS > less expensive than the L , but a large range of zoom (loss of quality?)

I would use the lens on a 450D and a 60D.

Thanks in advance!

8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineyerbol From Kazakhstan, joined Feb 2010, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4680 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Please take a look at Canon 15-85mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM lens. It is sharp and well build. Colors looks good too. It will give you good result paired with your 60D. I friend of mine got this combo and he is very pleased with the result. Take your 60D to the shop and try this lens on different focal length. Good luck!


With best regards from Almaty
User currently offlinemartin54 From Netherlands, joined Aug 2007, 35 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4268 times:

I shoot with Nikon nowadays but during my Canon years, the 17-85 IS must have been the worst lens I have ever owned. Horrible chromatic aberrations and unacceptable distortion levels at all focal lengths.
If I was still shooting Canon the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS would probably be my lens of choice.


User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6406 posts, RR: 39
Reply 3, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 4263 times:

If you're ever looking to go full frame, I suggest the 24-105. Great quality lens which is EF mount unlike the 15-85mm. The 15-85 is the upgrade of the 17-85 (which is a horrible lens and I don't recommend it) and would do a good job if you didn't care too much about the full frame aspect.


It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2885 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4224 times:

The only problem with the 24-105 is 24mm on a crop camera isn't all that wide for day to day use. I find I use my Sigma 10-22 nearly as much at the 24-105 in general photographer. It depends on your focal length needs really. The 24-105 will give excellent quality results, but you may favour the 15mm end of the 15-85 if that's what you need. Those extra few mm's make a big difference. If you don't need wider than 24mm, you won't be dissapointed with the 24-105, although it's not cheap for what it is.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineTonyholt777 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 185 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 4163 times:

Hi

I have a 60d and full frame 5dmkii. When you say your 100-400 L doesnt give you enough close range have you considered that at 100mm your 60d is actually working at 160mm FL? Hence the advice above re the 15-85 and 10-20 lenses because they are specific to the 60d crop sensor.

That said the 24-105mm L is a great lens and would complement your 100-400 L but remember its FL is 38-168mm on a 60d. A lot of people like the 35mm range for general photography and that might suit you, plus its a good investment if you ever get a full frame camera.

FWIW I often put my 17-40mm L on my 60d or 7D for general work and get great results. In all honesty I cant say that I use my 24-105mm L with either of those bodies although I do use them with my 100-400mm L from time to time.

Its a matter of personal preference - best of luck with your choice

tony


User currently offlineyerbol From Kazakhstan, joined Feb 2010, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4079 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

From the beginning I sugested Canon 15-85mm lens. It is wide and quality is good. Any L-class lens, let's say 17-40mm will be x 1.6 so I do not see point of using one. Some of my photos from Aktobe were taken with 15-85mm. In my opinion it works great. This hobby need few lenses  


With best regards from Almaty
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2885 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4077 times:

Quoting yerbol (Reply 6):
From the beginning I sugested Canon 15-85mm lens. It is wide and quality is good. Any L-class lens, let's say 17-40mm will be x 1.6 so I do not see point of using one.

I'm not quite sure what you mean there. The lens isn't 1.6x crop factor, the camera body (sensor) is. Regardless of the lens you attached to a crop body, it'll be 1.6x the focal length so it applies to the 15-85 just as much as a 17-40 or 24-105.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4769 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4002 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The 24-105L is a GREAT general use, all-around walk-around lens. If I can only bring one lens, that's the one I bring. And if you can get close enough, 105mm works for aviation as well.

Another consideration if you don't need something super wide is the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. Its a KILLER lens and for $450 it's probably the best bang for the buck out there right now. I got one in December and I have only used my 24-105 ONCE since!

Both lenses are perfect for travel and general photography. The Tamron is lighter and smaller and half the price, so that's another consideration. Both require close access for aviation, although the 25-105 gives more in terms of reach (obviously).



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Nikon Spotting Lens posted Sun Jun 19 2011 06:50:30 by EMA747
Photography Tips, Techniques And Spotting posted Fri Aug 6 2010 18:43:15 by PZ
IAH And Spotting posted Fri Jan 9 2009 18:16:17 by 76794p
Oshkosh And Spotting posted Sun Dec 21 2008 17:22:39 by 76794p
RAW -> JPG And Retaining Lens Information posted Sat Nov 8 2008 14:20:55 by SNATH
About The Boeing Airport And Spotting... posted Mon Feb 11 2008 06:27:54 by Sleekjet
Hotels And Spotting posted Fri Sep 14 2007 03:52:35 by AndyinPIT
Best Spotting Lens For Maxxum 5 posted Fri Apr 22 2005 23:13:10 by Zone1
Question Pentax Digital And Quantaray Lens posted Sun Apr 10 2005 05:46:04 by TACAA320
Miami Slide Show And Spotting Jan. 2003 posted Wed Jan 15 2003 18:32:11 by AAGOLD
About The Boeing Airport And Spotting... posted Mon Feb 11 2008 06:27:54 by Sleekjet
Hotels And Spotting posted Fri Sep 14 2007 03:52:35 by AndyinPIT
Best Spotting Lens For Maxxum 5 posted Fri Apr 22 2005 23:13:10 by Zone1
Question Pentax Digital And Quantaray Lens posted Sun Apr 10 2005 05:46:04 by TACAA320