I've had this lens for 4 or 5 months now. It's a keeper.
In case you're thinking about this lens...I had a problem with my 7D. It would back focus, front focus, really erratic. I returned it and picked up another one that did the same thing. It turned out it wasn't the lens, but my 7D. I removed the main battery and the clock battery and left the power in the on position all night...which is basically a "hard reset" of my 7D. Now it works great.
I've been thinking of this lens for a long time. Wonder if I should sell either my 16-35 or my 14 for it (or probably both) for when I hopefully restart doing photography (sometime in the new year). Personally I think that while the 14mm Sigma is a nice lens the 24L is nicer.
Your 16-35L is an extremely versatile lens. Ask yourself if you are using the 16-35L mostly at the 16mm, 24mm or 35mm focal lengths. If the answer is all of those focal lengths I would advise that you keep the zoom ... especially if you have a very sharp copy. I find myself reaching for my 17-40L more often than the 24L because of the zoom.
Snopchenko wrote:
I've been thinking of this lens for a long time. Wonder if I should sell either my 16-35 or my 14 for it (or probably both) for when I hopefully restart doing photography (sometime in the new year). Personally I think that while the 14mm Sigma is a nice lens the 24L is nicer.
I'm reporting all of you, so that this thread and it's posts get removed...I can't swing this lens now and I'm stupid for not buynig it when it was a refurb with 15% off.
RobertLynn wrote:
I'm reporting all of you, so that this thread and it's posts get removed...I can't swing this lens now and I'm stupid for not buynig it when it was a refurb with 15% off.
11% off at B&H right now.
RobertLynn wrote:
I'm reporting all of you, so that this thread and it's posts get removed...I can't swing this lens now and I'm stupid for not buynig it when it was a refurb with 15% off.
rogie wrote:
11% off at B&H right now.
And, believe it or not, the mk1 of the lens is 90% the fun at 50% the price. I had mine for what, 11 years?
RobertLynn wrote:
I'm reporting all of you, so that this thread and it's posts get removed...I can't swing this lens now and I'm stupid for not buynig it when it was a refurb with 15% off.
rogie wrote:
11% off at B&H right now.
stanj wrote:
And, believe it or not, the mk1 of the lens is 90% the fun at 50% the price. I had mine for what, 11 years?
RobertLynn wrote:
I've seriously considered an mk1, but I honestly think that I'm stupid, and fickle enough that it would bother me.
Yup, it's been bothering me for all those 11 years every time I picked it up.
stanj wrote:
Yup, it's been bothering me for all those 11 years every time I picked it up.
I don't think both versions were out for 11 years.
It would just get in my head or something stupid. I don't know. I'll see how it is when I am in the market. Though I've got the money, I want to save it towards a pair of 1DIV's.
stanj wrote:
I can dig up my receipt for the 24L dating to late 1997.
Can you dig up for receipt for the 24L Mk2 dating back to 1997?
My comment was, I do not believe that both were out for 11 years. More elaborately speaking, I don't think that you could've compared your version 1 to the-then, non-existant version 2.
So the expression "ignorance is bliss" is in full merit there. Basically, you couldn't enjoy the improvements of version 2, when it wasn't released yet.
I am not doubting that the original is over 11 in its vintage, but the version 2, if I am to understand correctly came out in 2008. While that is certainly 11 years from 1997, 2008-2011 is not 11 years.
As I've said before though, I'm thinking that if I own either version, you'll be one of the causes of it.
Please take a look at my comment. I'm saying that both versions were not out for 11 years. The first one was, yes, 14 years. The second one is just 3, if I recall the release of the 2nd correctly.
RobertLynn wrote:
Can you dig up for receipt for the 24L Mk2 dating back to 1997?
My comment was, I do not believe that both were out for 11 years. More elaborately speaking, I don't think that you could've compared your version 1 to the-then, non-existant version 2.
So the expression "ignorance is bliss" is in full merit there. Basically, you couldn't enjoy the improvements of version 2, when it wasn't released yet.
And this kind of moronic arguments is the reason why I have you normally hidden. Never did I say that I had both for 11 years.
Having owned the mk1 for 11 years, 9 of which I used it on full frame, I am fairly acquainted with its deficiencies and never found them to be all that bothersome. Given that I have shot both the mk1 and mk2 for an overlapping time on the same body (1Ds3 and 5D2), I feel like I am reasonably adept at making a comparison.
And this kind of moronic arguments is the reason why I have you normally hidden. Never did I say that I had both for 11 years.
Having owned the mk1 for 11 years, 9 of which I used it on full frame, I am fairly acquainted with its deficiencies and never found them to be all that bothersome. Given that I have shot both the mk1 and mk2 for an overlapping time on the same body (1Ds3 and 5D2), I feel like I am reasonably adept at making a comparison.
Then hide me again. I'm glad you couldn't see any humor in my initial post (ripping on myself for obsessive tendencies). I wasn't saying you couldn't make a comparison. I wasn't saying you didn't own the lens for 11 years. I wasn't saying you didn't shoot full-frame. I was simply saying taht there was no version 2 for you to obsess over the for first 11 years you used the version one.
Nothing more, nothing less. Glad you felt the need to make it a fight, call me a moron and start a fight on Christmas. Sorry for offending you so much.
