Why no mid-range Canon 28-300?

Started Jan 28, 2014 | Discussions thread
Gunzorro Senior Member • Posts: 1,889
Re: Why no mid-range Canon 28-300?

Because Canon went with a high quality professional "L" 28-300 IS lens there was no need to produce an inferior super-zoom like the Tamron and Nikon versions. Yes, it costs a lot, but you are replacing how many "L" lenses with it? Quite a few! And it's big, but again, how many less professional lenses are you saved from carrying? Again, quite a few. I own it, and it is one of my very favorite lenses. I've used it to cover diverse range of subjects: a few weddings, travel, and even the Space Shuttle move from LAX to the Science Center. Nothing takes its place.

Just look for a nice used version for around $1800 and be happy. Don't ask Canon to start crapping-up their quality lens line-up!

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow