DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> My first "L"
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 12 of 12, (reverse)
AuthorThread
06/30/2004 09:30:22 AM · #1
I just received my first L lens, 70-200 f4. Would have loved the f2.8 but I've got to feed the kidz. Now if I could only learn how to use this camera and make it work, I'd be all set.
06/30/2004 09:31:03 AM · #2
Best of luck cainn. Way to go. (B)
06/30/2004 10:14:19 AM · #3
Good for you. I'm still trying to decide on the 17-40 f4 L to replace my 18-55 kit lense. Can anyone give insight as to wheather this is a good idea or not? Is it worth it? I've read reviews but I can't seem to find too many side by side comparisons between the two. Not even at DPReview.
06/30/2004 10:17:06 AM · #4
This is not exactly what you are looking for but you might find it here:
//www.photo.net/equipment/canon/28zooms/
06/30/2004 10:17:41 AM · #5
Originally posted by K-Rob:

I can't seem to find too many side by side comparisons between the two.

I think that's pretty much because they're uncomparable!

Setz asked a week or so ago about comparisons between the 16-35/2.8 and 17-40/4.. Might be worth searching the forums (at work now, sorry)..
06/30/2004 10:19:21 AM · #6
Originally posted by cainn:

I just received my first L lens

Emphasis added by me.. ;-)

Congrats on your lens - nothing better than knowing you've got that extra quality when you need it.
06/30/2004 10:38:21 AM · #7
Originally posted by PaulMdx:

Originally posted by K-Rob:

I can't seem to find too many side by side comparisons between the two.

I think that's pretty much because they're uncomparable!


I'm not sure I totally agree. Sure, they are in different worlds in terms of build quality, but I'm more concerned about image quality and since they are roughly the same focal range I'm sure there are plenty of people that consider this lense to replace the kit lense. I've found some comparisons but nothing truly noteworthy or scientific.

Thanks for the tip on Setz's previous question. I'll try and find that.
06/30/2004 10:38:34 AM · #8
Will Koffel (wkoffel) made a comparsion of the two, I found it on his web site. Very interesting. I think Will will be responsible for many large investments in lens upgrades :)

Here's the link
06/30/2004 10:49:40 AM · #9
Originally posted by sahko:

Will Koffel (wkoffel) made a comparsion of the two, I found it on his web site. Very interesting. I think Will will be responsible for many large investments in lens upgrades :)

Here's the link


Ha. Sorry, Sahko. :-) My comparison is hardly a technical one. I didn't compare the same focal lengths, etc. I only had a few hours of daylight left to make the comparison before I shipped off my 18-55 lens to an ebayer who was modifying it for their 10D. And I like to spend my limited photo time on pictures instead of reviews if possible. But I too was curious enough about the different that it warranted at least a little side-by-side.

To cainn, congrats! I do have the 70-200/2.8 IS, but I don't have any kids to feed (yet!). And it's in the shop right now, so I'm using mostly my 50/1.4 prime for a while. Nice practice working with a fast prime again.

-Will
06/30/2004 11:08:24 AM · #10
Originally posted by wkoffel:

Originally posted by sahko:

Will Koffel (wkoffel) made a comparsion of the two, I found it on his web site. Very interesting. I think Will will be responsible for many large investments in lens upgrades :)

Here's the link


Ha. Sorry, Sahko. :-) My comparison is hardly a technical one.
-Will


wkoffel, Sahko:

Thanks for that link and comparisons between the two lenses. That's along the lines of what I was looking for. Although not the most scientific of tests it definitely showed me what I was looking for. Thanks again!
06/30/2004 11:20:49 AM · #11
Originally posted by K-Rob:

but I'm more concerned about image quality and since they are roughly the same focal range I'm sure there are plenty of people that consider this lense to replace the kit lense

I'd be exceptionally surprised if the L range didn't have VERY much better image quality. Not to mention distortions or CA, of which I'm sure there's a big difference too.

A good test would have been to crop the corner of the image, where the 18-55 will most likely be significantly softer.

I stand to be proven wrong.

Don't get me wrong, I have an 18-55 and it's a nice lens for the money, I like it. But it's not an L range.
06/30/2004 11:22:30 AM · #12
In fact, just from a 640x shot the corner difference is very noticable:

17-40
18-55

Take a look at the top left corner.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/01/2025 04:09:33 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 08/01/2025 04:09:33 PM EDT.