Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 65
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175

    Thumbs up Canon EF 70-200 f/4 L - 9

    Author: ReF
    Is this lens worth the price? Yes
    Would I buy this lens again? Yes

    ------------------------------------------

    Pros: very good build quality, sharp, light, comparatively small, cheap, nice bokeh. zoom and focus rings turn very smoothly.

    Cons:
    focus not as fast as i expected, but still quite good. large flare spot if shooting the moon off center (EDIT: that's with the canon 1.4x TC - did not try the same shots without the TC, so I'm not sure if it is a fault of the lens or the TC or both. Just another reason i have not rated this lens yet) - have not experienced flare during daytime yet.

    Would I buy again? At this early point, yes. Heck I literally spent several months researching and deciding between the 100-400L IS, 80-400 OS, 70-200L f2.8, 70-200L IS, 100-300 f4, sigma 70-200 f2.8, and this lens. It even came down to this lens and the 80-200L f2.8 right before I made my purchase.

    At times I wish I could get even more background blur than I can at f4 for portraits, but Iíve actually had a tough time getting enough DOF below F4 for portraits anyways, or maybe I just need more portrait shooting experience. Having a larger aperture for use with a 1.4x TC would be nice too. The 3 main reasons I bought this lens were small size/weight, closest focus distance of all the lenses I considered (for shooting indoors), and that ďLĒ quality look to itís images. So far none of the competing lenses offer the same optics/performance in a weight and size that comes close. Size/weight is a big deal to me, a guy who sometimes carries a bunch of gear on his back all day. Since I take my gear bag anywhere there might be a good photo opportunity, I didnít want a lens that I might leave at home due to itís size.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175

    Thumbs up Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 - 7.5

    Author: aparmley
    Is this lens worth the price? Yes
    Would I buy this lens again? No

    ------------------------------------------

    Pros: Fast @ 1.8 - usable if you are cautious. Cheap and worth more than what you'll pay to get one. light.

    Cons: Cheap plastic - must handle with care. Focuses fairly slow. Loud AF. Hunts in moderate light.

    Would you buy it again? - Nope. I'd get the 1.4 version if I felt I had to have a 50mm - I don't really love the 50mm / EFL 80mm. Its not my cup of joe. I constantly find it too short or too long.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175

    Thumbs up Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 APO - 7

    Author: aparmley
    Is this lens worth the price? Yes
    Would I buy this lens again? No

    ------------------------------------------

    Pros: Very decent lens for $200*. Macro functionality. if you have good light, this lens can produce some great color and contrast - good photos.

    Cons: Focuses fairly slow. Loud AF. Hunts in moderate light - low light forget about AF. Above 200mm photos appear fairly soft.

    Would you buy it again? - No. I wouldn't buy it again simply because it leaves a lot to be desired. I discovered that while people say how great fast lenses are for indoor shooting, I found that its very much needed as well outdoors for multiple reasons. First I found that shooting outdoors on extremely sunny days is hard to do in the shade. I mean, I found I was getting shutter speeds of right around 1/60 -1/200 depending on aperature and ISO setting - long story short, It was hard to get sharp photos in the shade with this lens. But, I'd recommed it to others who might need a tele zoom real fast for something coming up that won't allow time to save for a better one. But, I personally wouldn't buy it again - I'd hold out for at least the 70-200 F4 L but I'd try for the either of the 2.8s Sigma or Canon.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175

    Thumbs up Canon EF 17-40 f/4 L - 10

    Author: ReF
    Is this lens worth the price? Yes
    Would I buy this lens again? Yes!

    ------------------------------------------

    Pros: fastest focusing lens i own - greatly increases usefulness. good sharpness and contrast. IMO images from this lens have a little extra "Uumph" compared to the tamron at the same focal lengths and aperture, even though the tamron has higher contrast - i have no idea what that special something is. very good build quality with water seal at the mount. extremely low flare. very smooth zoom and focus rings.

    Cons: expensive, but well worth the $$$ IMO.

    Would i buy it again? a lens i rated 10? of course! Iíve heard that the sigma and tamron equivalents are actually sharper with higher contrast, but IMO the focusing speed and accuracy alone are worth the price difference.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175

    Thumbs up Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 - 8

    Author: aparmley
    Is this lens worth the price? Yes
    Would I buy this lens again? Yes

    ------------------------------------------

    Pros: Great focal length; Fast @ 1.8 - very usuable; sharp; solid build; quiet and quick USM - I think this lens would focus faster on a better body than the XT. I find the focus somewhat slow slightly faster than my Sigma cheapy; a lot faster than my 50 1.8 II - But I think this is a knock against the XT, not the lens.

    Cons: I can't thank of any cons at this point in time. Its just as advertised, fast(er) AF, quiet, sharp, very solid build, it actually feels like I am holding $350.

    Would you buy it again? - Yes. I love the FL, build quality, and the results are fantastic. My favorite lens right now.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175

    Thumbs down Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS - 4

    Author: ReF
    Is this lens worth the price? No
    Would I buy this lens again? No

    ------------------------------------------

    Pros: very good range. IS can be useful since this lens requires stopping down. excellent flare control.

    Cons: very low contrast and sharpness especially considering the price - far below the 28-135 IS. it was the first lens i bought and used with my dslr and it only took me a week to decide on returning it. the lens probably could be sharper and and cheaper if IS was not included. IS not really necessary at the focal lengths anyways. If the lens could be sharper at larger apertures I would hardly use the IS at all. With the tamron 28-75 f2.8, I never feel the need for IS - same thoughts with the 70-200 f4 up until around 135mm. but i guess IS is a feature that really sells for canon, so they include it and jack up the price.

    Would I buy again? Heck no! it would be recommendable if it were $400, but itís more like $550.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175

    Thumbs up Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS - 8

    Author: ReF
    Is this lens worth the price? Yes
    Would I buy this lens again? No

    ------------------------------------------

    Pros: very good range. IS is very useful at 135mm, since this lens should be used at f8 or higher. this lens actually has pretty good sharpness and contrast at f8. good value - low price, good range, good image quality, IS.

    Cons: for best results, aperture should be kept at f8 or smaller (limiting). not very wide angle so flaring is very rare in my use, but when it does, it's bad. tiny focus ring. contrast could stand to be higher. i would give it a slightly lower rating with all the cons, but when i think about the price and all the great images i've gotten from the lens, i just can't rate it any lower.

    Would I buy again? For my semi-decent budget and needs? No. though I would still recommend this lens for those on a budget or those who have the need for a walk-around lens thatís more geared towards tele shots than wide angle. The IS definitely comes in handy when shooting at 135mm ISO 400 above f8 near sunrise/sunset or with a polarizer.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Near New Orleans
    Posts
    1,264

    Canon 17-40 f/4L USM Rated - 9

    Author: Bluedog
    Is this lens worth the price? Yes
    Would I buy this lens again? Yes

    ------------------------------------------

    Pros: Build quality is unmatched in the Canon mount line up. Fast focusing with USM and the range coverage to me makes it the near perfect walk around lens. Excellent Color output. In todays world of high quality ISO DSLR's upping the ISO to gain an f/stop isn't a problem that I've seen with this lens being an f/4. My copy is very sharp wide open so thats a big plus.

    Cons: The included lens hood is useless unless you have a Full Frame camera. That's why I rate it a 9 as Canon should have an option to purchase the Lens with the EW-83DII Lens Hood.

    Would I buy this lens again? Yes
    Last edited by Bluedog; 11-17-2005 at 05:01 AM.
    .

    Canon EOS 30D | Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 | Canon 17-40mm f/4L | Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS| Canon 70-200mm f/4L | Canon Speedlite 430EX + Sto-Fen Omni Bounce | Manfrotto 3001BD & 680B/486RC2 | Hoya Super HMC Pro1 Digital Filters | Hitech ND & GND Filters | Bags > Kata R-103 + Lowepro Nova 5 AW

    RawShooter | premium 2006 > My PBase Gallery

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590

    Sigma f2.8 18-50mm EX DC (sorry Rex ;) )

    Author: I guess that would be me
    Is this lens worth the price? Yes
    Would I buy this lens again? Maybe

    ------------------------------------------

    Pros: When focussed well it performs very good. It has a very useful range and is quite sharp when stopped down a bit. It is nice and compact, has a solid feel to it and its build quality is very good. Comes with a nice hood.
    The 18-50 range mimics the 35mm standard zoom range of 28-80mm, and with its f2.8 it is quite useful in low light. Distortion of this lens is not bad, if you have a Nikon camera this lens really challenges the 17-55 f2.8 Nikkor (of 3x its price) in optical performance. Fast focussing.

    Cons: My copy does not like to focus consistently. This is an ill you may see sometimes with Sigma lenses on Canon DSLR's. Why with Canon the lens makes such a difference in focussing is not yet clear to me, it has to do with how the lens and body communicate about when the best focus is reached. It has a warm colour cast like most Sigmas have (but that can quite easily be corrected in post processing or with the camera's white balance if needed).
    In the dark it can not focus on close subjects with the EOS 350D's strobe flash. This probably is related to its strange focussing behavior.

    Would I buy this lens again? Maybe.
    Its build and size make it a very nice lens to walk around with. The wide angle is handy, it can perform well if you take care while making photos.
    On the other side, its cumbersome focussing (on my copy on Canon) can be very frustrating. Sigma, do something about your Canon mounts! You make some great lenses but make them more compatible...
    Last edited by coldrain; 11-19-2005 at 02:22 AM.
    Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175
    Thanks for the reviews. Keep em coming.

    Edit: coldrain, add in "Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 DC EX - {rating}" as the title to your post. Thanks!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •