How does this lens compare as an all around lens for (portraits, street, travel) for a 7D to the 28 is usm lens?
756010
I have the Canon 7D. The Canon 28mm f/1.8 is not IS but I wanted it for low light. The Canon 28mm IS f/2.8 would be a good lens for your needs. (This is my opinion). But for portraits I use the Canon 85mm f/1.8. Hope this helps.
756011
Only difference is image stabilization. You might prefer IS on your crop sensor. On full frame the lens is wide enough to not need it. This is a great lens.
190060
Both lenses perform well, so I will offer up an opinion based upon the focal length that will best accommodate your request: The wide effect of these lenses is highly marginalized by your 50D's cropped sensor. Both focal lengths offer similar results for full-bodied portraits. If you like to frame your subject off centered, or get really close and crop your subject within the frame, the 28mm is noticably less distorted-which you will likely find more flattering to the face. Despite having similar focal lengths, if you spend a day with both lenses you will develop an immediate preference. I prefer the 24mm as an all-around lens (particularly for landscapes with towering features or street photography). However, I would opt for a 28mm or 35mm if I were primarily photographing people.
1101119
I was not aware of the 70D...It looks like a very good upgrade to the 7D that I am using now. This lens should work and I am a very strong believer in this lens. I just returned from a photo trip to Big Bend, Texas and shot most of my images in HDR with the 7D and this lens. I am not at all disappointed. I also use it for portraits. This lens is sharp from edge to edge. If you have any reservations amour compatibility check the Canon website.
1784426
The lens is great for all around use. Tack sharp and worth every penny. If you plan on moving full frame it's worth it. On a DX body it will act like a 36-105. It's a bit on the weighty side but not over bearing. I have found the images have a certain pop to them that most other lenses can't provide unless they have the nano coating. Your other option is the great 17-55 which is designed for DX cameras. Look online there are some great reviews. If money isn't an issue go for it.
1966947
This is no easy call. Both lenses are said to perform similarly in terms of IQ. I've owned the EF 28mm f/1.8 and was never happy with it due to innacuracy of AF and image softness. Some folks like it quite a bit. Not my case. I wouldn't recommend this lens. I've read good reviews about the Sigma 30 mm, but I lack first hand experience. My two cents worth...
320074
I have a D800 and all the lenses you listed as well. The 35 i think would lend itself to portraits and the like. I take mostly outdoor stuff which the 28=300 is a fantastic all around lens that I use for a walk around lens. Necessary no not at all but a nice addition.
963339
This is like comparing apples to oranges. The 70-300mm VR is strictly a "consumer-prosumer" grade lens. Think of it as the "cheap version" of the famous Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II lens. The 28-300mm VR lens is more for the serious amateur or professional on the go that shoots full frame 35mm or DX. I use 2 Nikon D800's and the 28-300mm lens is on one of them at all times. The newer version that is out now is better than the first issue of a couple years ago, and even at 36 megapixels, I'm getting clean, clear, crisp shots...something I rarely got with my 70-300mm lens. To be perfectly honest, with a GOOD quality multi-coated UV filter on it, you can use this lens all day without changing lenses once. It has become my "walking around" lens of choice. In fact, I just got back from Hawaii and used it for 9 days straight without using any of the other 7 lenses I had in my bag. I recommend it, even for your D7000...you'll just end up shooting an effective range of 105mm to 450mm, or a LOOOONNNNGGGG telephoto lens when you need it.
884485
I use it on a 7D and love it. You'll probably need a tripod or high ISO for really close macro work. I use it hand held for garden shots of frogs and insects, and get sharp photos. It makes a beautiful portrait lens, too. You're far enough away to put your subjects at ease, and if you shoot with an wide open lens (2.8) you'll get a gorgeous soft background.
2240581
Thank you Very much for your Help, what do you think about the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II and the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM? If you had the money for only one general purpose lens, wich one will you chose?
384510
The 5D2 with the 24-105 lense is a great walk-around combo. The vignetting is hardly noticeable. Good Choice!
1561300
So now I am wondering just what I am missing with regards to buying this lens for use on a DSLR like the Canon EOS 5D versus the much more expensive "EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM for EOS SLR"???
2272800
I used this mainly for street photography. I used it with a 60d. I like it because it's a very fast lens. This is also my go-to lens for vacation. I won't be able to give you an honest opinion on Northern lights.
305765
I generally use prime lens so, perhaps, I am not the best person to ask. With this said, the 28 f1.8 is excellent optically. On a D800E, the 100% view is tack sharp (assuming good shooting technique). You print excellent quality 17 16 by 20 or so. I haven't tested beyond that. The rendering is also very good. Hard to believe that the 28 - 300 would be an equal.
678604
The f4 is a super good all around lens and pretty nice for wildlife etc. More of an outdoor lens. If you're more indoor, portrait, etc, go for the 2.8. It is much larger however. I went with the f4 first because it gives more range of use.
2011961
I hvae had my Canon 24-105mm f/4 L lens for about three years now, and it's the best and most versatile lens I have ever owned. it was recommended to me independently by two photographer friends, one in the UK, the other in the USA. I have travelled extensively with it to Eastern & Wetsren Europe, using it as my only lens (leaving my 70-300mm and 10-22mm Canon lenses behind to save on weight). Using a high ISO and high shutter speed, the lens is so good that I don't really need a telephoto lens, as cropping considerably to blow up a photo still gives great clarity. The macro part of the lens is excellent. A 17-40mm lens would be very restricting as a general walkabout lens, and I've always reckoned 105mm as being a good focal length for portraits. I do a lot of street people shots where speed is of the essence, and it's a very fast & responsive lens. The zoom is very smooth and responsive. It's not cheap, but to me it's been worth every penny. I use it on my Canon 7D.
1413083
If you want an all-purpose lens, get the cheap 18-200mm. The 28-300mm is just not a very good lens when you consider the price and weight and image quality. For that money, you could buy two very good lenses.
282260
I use the 28mm for more of a wide angle shot. I would recommend the 50 for family portraits. They both have a good bokeh effect but I found the 50mm was sharper