| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/21/2005 12:26:23 PM · #1 |
This lens seems like an excellent lens, it would vastly broaden my field to weddings and concerts. This seems like just the lens I'd need.
However, what I'm really looking for is a versatile lens with wide-angle AND telephoto, yet retains sharpness and handholdability (fast).
On a 1.6x sensor, anything over 24mm isn't wide enough. So I don't want to hear about the 28-200, I need a wide walk-around.
What do people think of this lens? I doubt I could justify the expense, so any suggestions on good wedding/concert/walkaround lenses would be very helpful. Remember: Fast, sharp, good range, that's what I'm looking for.
Thanks! |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 12:33:38 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by Plexxoid:
Remember: Fast, sharp, good range, |
Those three things don´t usually go together.
Anyway, have owned the 24-70L for almost a year now and I love everything about it, including the weight that so many people whine about because it balances very well on my 10D with a battery grip. It´s sharp, it´s wide enough for me 95% of the time and it´s sharp at all apertures, even at 2.8 although you see a difference at f4 in sharpness compared to 2.8. The only thing you need to ask yourself if the range suits you, it does suit me and this lens is the one I use for about 70% of my shooting and I can´t reccomend it highly enough. |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 12:57:06 PM · #3 |
I have a 17-40L and a 28-135mm IS
These are both great all purpose walking around lenses. The 17-40 is super sharp with great contrast and the 28-135 is great for low light because of the IS.
Have you try them. look around for somewhere you can rent them for the day and give them a try. |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 01:00:26 PM · #4 |
Too bad the forum search doesn't work for "words" containing numbers, there has been plenty of recent discussion of this lens.
Bottom line, I agree with your assessment that there is asignificant difference between 24mm and 28mm, and I would not substitute a 28-xx either. I had a 28-xx, and I definitely enjoy that extra 4mm.
the 24-70 is an absolutely stunning lens. The sharpness, contrast and color rendition are superb, CA is almost never in evidence, and distortion is very low. I routinely use this lens for hand-held panos @ 24mm, and I'm able to stitch them with less than 1.0px average error (sometimes <1.0px MAX error!) in Panotools/PTGUI.
Yes, it is rather large and somewhat heavy, but I find that it balances well with the larger bodies. It may be a bit "front-heavy" with the 300D. Build quality is excellent as you would expect with Canon L glass. There were some earlier reported problems with the mount for the hood but Canon seems to have cleared that up.
Bottom line, is this lens worth the $1100? Yes, absolutely. Accept no substitutes.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 01:07:06 PM · #5 |
If the Canon L-glass version is out of your price range, have you considered the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX Aspherical DG DF lens with hood? At $409 this lens may offer acceptable quality at a price point in your budget.
You might also want to look at the Sigma 24-135mm f2.8-4.5 IF for $299.99, but you will be trading a stop and a third of speed for the extra reach on this lens. I suspect (I don't recall for sure) that the 28-70 is a sharper lens than this one as well.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 01:22:27 PM · #6 |
| might be sold but here's a used one for under $800.here |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/14/2025 07:16:40 PM EDT.
