UTA_flyinghigh
Posts: 6304
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2001 8:46 pm

Your Thoughts On The Canon 35/350 F/3.5-5.6L USM?

Mon Sep 13, 2004 1:17 am

I am impatiently waiting for my 20D to arrive, and I had initially thought of getting the 70/200 f/4.0L. However, it is a bit short for some of the airports I regularly visit, and I fear an extender would annihilate most of that f/4.0 advantage.
The 100/400 L IS USM is nice, but a bit too heavy for me.
The 35/350 L USM f/3.5-5.6 seems like the best compromise, do any of you own this lens ? your thoughts would be appreciated.

Regards,
Will
Fly to live, live to fly - Air France/KLM Flying Blue Platinum, BMI Diamond Club Gold, Emirates Skywards
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: Your Thoughts On The Canon 35/350 F/3.5-5.6L USM?

Mon Sep 13, 2004 1:25 am

Is the 100-400 much heavier?

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
runway23
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:12 am

RE: Your Thoughts On The Canon 35/350 F/3.5-5.6L USM?

Mon Sep 13, 2004 1:49 am

Will,

Stay away from the 35-350L it's by far the worst L zoom lens canon make. I still personally find the 100-400L is the best zoom lens for aviation photography. If you are tight for money you might want to check out the 50-500 or 100-500 which Sigma have, both producing acceptable results.

Tim
 
IL76
Posts: 2237
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 5:43 am

RE: Your Thoughts On The Canon 35/350 F/3.5-5.6L USM?

Mon Sep 13, 2004 4:54 am

I think the 35-350 and 100-400 have the same kind of construction in terms of size and weight (same as the new 28-300). Personally I don't think it's heavy really...
BTW (Swiss) Tim, the 50-500 Sigma is even heavier!  Wink/being sarcastic
Cheers,
Eduard
 
runway23
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:12 am

RE: Your Thoughts On The Canon 35/350 F/3.5-5.6L USM?

Mon Sep 13, 2004 5:08 am

Eduard,

I know the Sigmas are heavier but if someone is too wimpy to carry a lens around then they are better to stay at home  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

I have to agree though the 100-400 may seem heavy but it really isn't and it is a great piece of glass.

Tim
 
chris78cpr
Posts: 2733
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 7:44 am

RE: Your Thoughts On The Canon 35/350 F/3.5-5.6L USM?

Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:25 am

The 35-350 is an old design that has been replaced by the 28-300. It is known as being fairly soft through the range but especially at 300-350! I would avoid the lens and get a 70-200F4 and 1.4x convertor or a 100-400!

Chris
5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
 
TWAMD-80
Posts: 962
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 8:25 am

RE: Your Thoughts On The Canon 35/350 F/3.5-5.6L USM?

Mon Sep 13, 2004 7:29 am

Chris, how does the quality of the 70-200 + 2x compare to the quality of the 100-400? I'd assume that there'd be a decrease in quality but is it really that much?

Tim
Two A-4's, left ten o'clock level continue left turn!
 
chris78cpr
Posts: 2733
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 7:44 am

RE: Your Thoughts On The Canon 35/350 F/3.5-5.6L USM?

Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:02 am

I would personnally not use a 2x with a 70-200F4, and only use it on a 2.8, but still rarely at that! The 2x is designed for high quality optics found in the high end L series primes! It can be used on the 70-200 but you lose sharpness/contrast and quality. The 100-400 will be better quality as it has does not have another layer of glass to go through before the imaging sensor!

Chris
5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
 
runway23
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:12 am

RE: Your Thoughts On The Canon 35/350 F/3.5-5.6L USM?

Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:06 pm

Also you will loose focussing abilities on the 70-200 f/4 if you go for a 2x converter which makes you loose 2 f stops. The 1.4x works well though on the 70-200 f/4.

Tim
 
UTA_flyinghigh
Posts: 6304
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2001 8:46 pm

RE: Your Thoughts On The Canon 35/350 F/3.5-5.6L USM?

Mon Sep 13, 2004 5:29 pm

Ha !
So it appears that the aforementioned 35/350 is a piece of crap...
So now the next question; 70/200 f/4.0 + 1.4x extender or the (rhaa, heavy) 100/400 ?
Many thanks for your replies btw.

Will
Fly to live, live to fly - Air France/KLM Flying Blue Platinum, BMI Diamond Club Gold, Emirates Skywards
 
Tin67
Posts: 267
Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 3:49 am

RE: Your Thoughts On The Canon 35/350 F/3.5-5.6L USM?

Tue Sep 14, 2004 3:22 am

So now the next question; 70/200 f/4.0 + 1.4x extender or the (rhaa, heavy) 100/400 ?

If you're considering the 100-400 then I personally would pay a little more and go for the 70-200 f2.8 IS L. This will take both extenders.

I owned a 100-400 and the 70-200 f4 but sold them both. The 70-200 f4 is a lovely compact and light lens. Great for traveling and produces excellent results with the 1.4x extender. I thought the 100-400 was superb until I went digital and then I thought it was "just" good. I sold them both and bought the 70-200f2.8 and a prime 300mm.

The 70-200 f2.8 is a superb lens and with and without the 1.4x extender produces fantastic results. I tend not to use it with the 2x extender as I use the prime for this range, but with this combination it's pretty close to the 100-400.

The 70-200 f2.8 IS is heavier than the 100-400, but it really isn't a problem to hand hold either of them.

Regards
Martin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests