picnic Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
CKrueger wrote:
II compared my 28-75 to two copies of the 24-70L. The 28-75 beat them both in every regard except AF speed. Most notably better was its wide open corner performance. The 24-70L is a great lens, but I'm happier with the 28-75 because it's smaller and does at least as good a job so long as the job isn't shooting sports or action. (And I don't do that at 75mm.)
This lens is an absolute workhorse. Paired with a 5D it made my primes accumulate dust in the closet, not just for its superior convenience, but for its excellent IQ and character of its images as well. Even though I've sold my 5D for a 40D and find the 28-75's focal range much less versatile than before, it's still a great portrait maker, and well worth its cost.
SNIP
I've had the 24-70L since it came out the end of 2002. I used it quite a lot--both for commercial and my personal shooting. After carrying it (plus several other lense) for several weeks hiking in Maine, I decided the next Spring to try the 28-75. Its on my 5D almost always--or at least in my bag--I rarely use my primes either and the 24-70L languishes on the shelf. Same story--AF a bit slower in quite low light, but that's okay with me for my style of shooting.
Diane
|