I've used it on the EOS-20D and now the EOS-5D. I don't know whether this is because I have an exceptional copy, SLRGear tested a duff copy, or for some reason the test does not accurately reflect the lens performance in real-world shooting.īasically, I find the lens eminently usable at all apertures and focal lengths, including wide-open at the long end. I have to say my practical experience with this lens does not agree with the test results published here. Well, it *is* a bargain telezoom, so what do you expect? If you find that you still shoot mostly landscapes, you will not have wasted much money and gained a good "just in case" lens. If, after some usage, you find that you like the possibilities that telephoto lenses open, chances are that you will replace it with a better (and more expensive) lens as I did. If your other lens is the EF-S 18-55 "kit lens" I'd give (and actually gave) this tele zoom a try, given its cost it is likely worth the investment. You will not be able to freeze wild animals or birds with it for example, but you can take good candids of your wife and kids, blur the background nicely around them, and doing that without standing right in front of them and thus distracting them with your aimed camera. When it gets down to it, it is only a matter or what one's real needs are. It can turn out quite a valuable tool for beginners eager to experiment on telephotography but unwilling to pay for a "prosumer" zoom lens.įar from deliver stunning award-winning pictures, this lens is however capable of taking decent shots, much better than one might expect from price and build quality. If you are a beginner, it allows you to drop landascapes and concentrate on details. Its focal range covers many common situations of casual photography, from head-and-shoulder portraits at 55mm to candid shots. Other reviews have already covered all technical aspects such as sharpness and IQ in general, so I will concentrate on my usage experience. It is a cheap lens, but I actually enjoyed it. I used this lens for 8 months or so, before replacing it with a 70-300 f/3.5-5.6. The one caveat we'd add is that if you need to shoot wide open at 200mm - for sports shots, say - this really isn't the lens for you, as it's really quite soft at that specific combination of aperture and focal length.Ĭheaply built, slow and a bit soft. The bottom line here is that this isn't a lens that stacks up to the standards of Canon's expensive higher-end models, but it's a very workmanlike option for photographers on a budget, particularly if there's enough light to shoot stopped down to f/8 or so. (The inflection point of zero distortion happens somewhere around 75-80mm.) Geometric distortion is also quite low, with 0.3% barrel distortion at 55mm, gradually transitioning to about 0.25% pincushion at 200mm. Exposure uniformity is surprisingly good, with a maximum light falloff of 1/4 EV wide open at 55mm, but less than 1/10th EV at any other focal length or aperture. Like many budget lenses, it does better when stopped down a fair bit, delivering optimum sharpness at apertures between f/8 and f/11.Ĭhromatic aberration is on the high side of average at the two ends of its focal length range, but is actually quite low near the middle. (Actually, this is a pretty long zoom on dSLRs with APS-C size sensors, like the Rebel series and the EOS-20D.) Given its bargain price, it actually doesn't do too badly optically, although it does have trouble when shot wide open at its maximum tele setting. As noted above, this is Canon's "budget tele zoom," intended for SLR shooters on a budget, but who still want a decent mid-range tele zoom.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |