I've spent countless hours reading forums, reviews (photographyreview.com) and finding best pricing on lenses that I'm wanting to acquire.

I've got a new Canon Rebel 2000 w/ a 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 standard lens. Obviously I need a zoom lens to go with it. I'm VERY tempted to just go and buy a 28-200mm by either Canon or Sigma... I can get a Sigma for $175 new, and a Canon for $350 new. Canon's twice the price, but from reviews I've read - Canon doesn't have annoying zoom creep, as well as loss of sharpness on the long end (unlike Sigma), and it also has USM.

I don't know if I'd feel good buying a $350 lens for a $150 camera, and having to sell my original standard lens.. so I've also considered just buying an addition to the standard, like an 80-200mm Canon for $100, or a 75-300 Canon for $150.

I've been trying to figure out how much it will annoy me to have to take off the 28-80 and put on a 80-200 or 75-300 everytime I want to zoom into a subject.. especially considering that I'm going to Europe for the New Year's. People say the 28-200 is a great lens for traveling. Hmmm...

And with Sigma, if I was to get a 28-200, I might as well get a 28-300 for an extra $50. Then I've read that the full 300mm zoom on a Sigma is really about 220mm on a 75-300 Canon lens. WTF? Will it be the same on a 28-200 Canon Lens too?

So I guess my choices are:

Canon:

$100 for 80-200mm [Good reviews, hassle to switch for composition?] $150 for 75-300mm [Same as above, heard it's bad for indoors] $350 for 28-200mm [Very good reviews, multipurpose range]

Sigma:

$175 for 28-200mm [Fairly good quality, softness at 175mm+, zoom creep] $225 for 28-300mm [Softness at 200mm+, zoom creep]

Arg. What makes this all the more difficult is I'd like to have this by the end of the week, which means I should order either today or tomorrow, since XMas is coming and it may be too late for the trip if I don't order soon.

Please help? I appreciate you fellas taking the time to read..

-- Romy Makhmoudov (romy@vc4less.com), December 17, 2001

Answers

I wouldn't sweat this decision Romy. Neither of these 28-200/300mm choices will provide you with a great lens. None of them have really good optical quality. They all make significant compromises to keep the zoom ratio large, the overall size small and the price low. So there really isn't anything to be stressed about. You just need to get the one you like for the money you want to spend. Realizing that you are getting less than great optics in exchange for convenience.

The Canon 28-200 has a quieter focus motor but it's image quality is not significantly better than the Sigma. Also the Sigma may not be compatible with future Canon camera bodies, in fact it probably won't be if history has anything to say about it. The Sigma is clearly the price leader, but you also ought to consider the Tamron 28-200 while you're at it. The new one is a really nice size, and they have a much better record concerning future compatibility.

If you want better quality, move up to a Canon 24-85, 28-105 or 28- 135. They are all built better, are optically sharper and offer Full Time Manual focusing. (A really nice feature.) The Tamron 24-135 is supposed to be a nice lens as well, but I haven't tried it.

Stay away from 28-300mm lenses. The optical compromises in 28-200mm lenses are bad enough.

-- Jim Strutz (j.strutz@gci.net), December 17, 2001.

Thanks for the detailed reply Jim!

-- Romy M (slay@usa.com), December 18, 2001.

Just a couple of additonal comments. We all get afflicted with equipment fever where we start thinking about what we need to cover every situation as opposed to what type of photographs we want to take. As a new camera owner, why don't you take the lens you have to Europe, and at the end of the trip, see what photographs you've missed by not having a certain focal length. Personally, for travel, I'd be alot more concerned about going wide then going long. But that's just me. Unless you have a specific goal in mind, don't spend the money on a lens you may not use, like or need as you develop your owm shooting style.

As far as the various 28-200 and 28-300 lenses go, they are not bad lenses but they represent a compromise in optical quality and available aperture. The softness at the long end of the lenses is further compromised by the fact that they are almost never used with a tripod. Even with fast film, it can be difficult to get handholdable shutter speeds or apertures that allow sufficient depth of field.

Finally, changing lenses need not be that difficult or time consuming. For travel, I like a small manual focus body with three prime lenses. This along with a flash fits in a small waist pack. With the top open, I can quickly remove a lens from the camera and fit another. At the same time, I am using lenses with faster apertures than zooms, and better optical quality.

-- Eric Onore (eonore@aol.com), December 18, 2001.