 |
|
|
Califfoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 18, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 26
|
|
Review Date: Jan 1, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, Fast
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy
|
|
I borrowed this lens from a friend of mine. Really love the f2.8.
Has all the qualities of a L zoom Lens
Here's an example: http://califoto.my-expressions.com/archives/2186_1665899495/114534
As usual, click on the Comments tab to get the exif
|
|
 Jan 1, 2006
|
|
lotisb
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 27, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Dec 27, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,500.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
f/2.8; IS; build quality; color & contrast; sharp!
|
|
Cons:
|
None that won't fall in the category of nit picking... Well, the hood is a bit obtrusive. With the hood you are SEEN, without the hood you are not that visible.
|
|
|
I have no problem walking around with this lens. Many have complained that it is a bit heavy, but really now... One of the main things I like is that I can shoot at speeds as slow as 1/50 @ full zoom and still get SHARP pictures, the IS is that amazing. This is the only lens I own that does not need tweaking beyond USM in PS. There is a slight learning curve but once you spend enough time to learn this lens you will not be disappointed. Paired with the 1.4x Extender decent range can be achieved. A sturdy tripod is necessary if you want to use one. I do wish Canon would have made a smaller lens hood. The thing is just TOO big.
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2005
|
|
stelin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 22, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Dec 22, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Speed of lens, speed of focus, sharpness, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight and price
|
|
|
One word -- Awesome.
Given the price in the UK I swallowed many times, walked round the block, gulped and then nervously handed over the plastic. I haven't regretted it for a second since.
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2005
|
|
Vadim
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 13, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Dec 16, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp lens, Beautiful color, Fast and very accurate AF, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
a bit heavy, white lens and a bit expensive (but worth it in my opinion)...
|
|
|
This was my second lens and bought it last year. It's an amazing lens and you will be very pleased with the shots you get with it. the F2.8 is really great to have and the bokeh is really nice.
You really need very little PS as the lens is really sharp !!!
Excellent lens to have
|
|
|
Dec 16, 2005
|
|
Michael-M
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Apr 21, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 2698
|
|
Review Date: Dec 15, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,850.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
SUPER Sharp!!! beautiful build and AF performance! IS works perfect.
|
|
Cons:
|
yes, i know want another 24-70f/2.8L
|
|
|
i'd gladly have paid more for this lens.
i've used my f/4 version for some time and as always, found it to be quite a challenge in low light levels.
after having such a poor time with my long gone 24-70, i believed that f/2.8 was just a useless aperture on these high end zooms........how wrong i am. i am so anal when it comes to buying my glass that i have to test at least 2 copies of a lens before i'll buy. i decided to try this lens and was expecting results at f/2.8 to be similar to the 24-70 i once had. let me tell you, when i got home and began viewing the images from the two copies i tried, i was blown away at what i saw at all zoom settings wide open from the one i selected. this is the sharpest lens i have used yet..........made me believe in the 24-70 again, and have since tested 3 copies of that lens as well...............so far, 1 is equal to my 70-200.
buy this lens and forget about primes in this range.
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2005
|
|
jmraso
Online
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 26, 2004
Location: Spain
Posts: 1893
|
|
Review Date: Dec 13, 2005
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely sharp lens not being a prime. excellent color rendition.
Built, confidence.
|
|
Cons:
|
None, honestlly.
|
|
Just another Canon master piece.
Very happy clients when I sell my work.
Jaime
www.jmraso.com
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2005
|
|
Leehman
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 515
|
|
Review Date: Dec 12, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,525.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast, Sharp, IS that works, dust protection.
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy(but we know that) Price
|
|
|
I have been using this lens for five months before posting any comments.
I am very pleased with the operation and photos produced using the lens.
I was very concerned about the weight. Found I could use it all day without getting tired. (I think this is better then lifting at the gym).
Leehman
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2005
|
|
jmraso
Online
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 26, 2004
Location: Spain
Posts: 1893
|
|
Review Date: Dec 12, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
IS, sharpness, touch and the wonderful color rendition.
|
|
Cons:
|
none at the moment, honsetly.
|
|
I do recomend this lens to any one who want certain reach and don´t want a boring prime.
Excellent prints, never a complain from my clients.
Go for it.
Jaime
www.jmraso.com
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2005
|
|
smac
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 28, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 11
|
|
Review Date: Dec 10, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,575.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely sharp, great IS.
|
|
Cons:
|
good things come in big packages
|
|
|
The optical performance of this lens is spectacular. Sharp, excellent contrast, rich true color. The IS works flawlessly. I'm not as steady as I may have been once, so I upgraded to this from the 70-200mm f4 and am glad I did. It's a very fast handling lens and works well w/ TC. Go ahead, you only live once.
|
|
|
Dec 10, 2005
|
|
chancellor
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 225
|
|
Review Date: Dec 3, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,600.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, fast, built like a tank.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
|
As I finally got myself into DSLR photography, I decided to purchase a decent glass. I contemplated for a while about purchasing 28-300L, 24-70L, 28-135 and this baby.
28-300 fell off my radar due to push-pull (some people love it on 100-400L, but it just didn't do it for me). Also lack of rebate on it perhaps added another 10% to the decision.
24-70L - excellent glass and I imagine that I'll get it at some point once I really feel that there is a gap using my 70-200L IS.
28-135 - wasn't "L" though for the price, reputation and all-around zoom makes it a very attactive walk-around lens.
After reading reviews and looking at all the options in B&H, I made a call to go with this glass and have on the body all the time for a while. Let me tell you, this lens worth every penny. I have taken pictures indoor and outdoor and all are extremely sharp. As a matter of a fact, friend of mine who has a lot of high-end Canon glass, decided to add this to his collection after taking a few shots with it.
The built is phenomenal. I enjoy taking it out of the bag ieven if I'm not shooting just to appreciate the art of it.
Hope you found this useful.
|
|
|
Dec 3, 2005
|
|
Shaitan
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 2, 2005
Location: Japan
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Dec 2, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp pictures - Fast AF - Build quality is astonishing (looks like some kind of NASA stuff) - IS works pretty well - works well with the 1.4 extender
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight (especially with the extender mounted) - Price
|
|
|
Quite expensive beast but you have what you paid for.
I highly recommend this lens.
|
|
|
Dec 2, 2005
|
|
elOsito
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 29, 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Dec 2, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,700.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
fast (both Motor and F2,8) very usable for portrait shooting in alternating shooting conditions. Heaviness feels good :)
|
|
Cons:
|
can get a little heavy after a whole while. IS is very nice, but in some situations too slow(!)
|
|
Bought this baby a few weeks ago and was very pleased right from the start. The colour (both lens&images =) ), the fast AF, the nice bokeh and the IS. Oh i'm so glad for this feature with my achy-shaky-hands 
But there is one thing wrong with the IS: You have to wait half a second before you can release the shutter. If you dont wait (like i did a couple of times) and you have a slow shutterspeed of about 1/40th of a second the following might happen:
i aimed at the nose of my cat, half-pressed the button to focus and to activate the gyrosensores for shake-detecting. I then moved away from the face (to get it out of the center) ... pushed the button ... and got a blurry picture.
The reason for this is the IS Lens element that has to move along all the way you move when you chose another framing. If you are faster than the IS can "move along" with your movement, the IS-Element will still be in motion while the picture is being taken, thus causing "movement blur" (if i may call it that way )
So, i think that i have to relearn my techniques and do it like ... focus - move - wait - wait - shoot.
personally, i don't believe that there are no such problems with other Image Stabilizing procedures like the nikon VR or the sigma OS. No one speaks of it, of course, but i thought that it had to be mentioned  (please dont kill me, my friends and my family, mighty canon - nikon and/or sigma corp. :D)
|
|
|
Dec 2, 2005
|
|
rubendpara
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 16, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 347
|
|
Review Date: Nov 29, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,500.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
everything
|
|
Cons:
|
none yet. maybe heavy ,but i prefer eat my wheaties everyday than miss the pictures you can take with it.
|
|
|
If you are still thinking(looking) if the IS worth the $'s . I should say if you want a 70-200 to shot on a bright day light and you have a steady hand hold at 200mm , or you want a 70-200 2.8L and Tripod combo then it's not worth the extra $'s for everything else you must save extra $'s to buy it . you won't regret it.
|
|
|
Nov 29, 2005
|
|
dehowie
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 22, 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 808
|
|
Review Date: Nov 22, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Everything
|
|
Cons:
|
none.
|
|
|
Superb piece of glass complemented by a superb IS system.
I cant speak highly enough of this lens and it has allowed me to do stuff like 1/15th panning shots at over 300mm equiv with amazing results.
No other lens available could get near it due tothe combination of greatglass backed up by an amazingly good IS unit.
Awesome and i'd buy it again in a heartbeat.
Darren
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2005
|
|
noah2950
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 27, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 290
|
|
Review Date: Nov 22, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,500.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, sharpness, IS, f/2.8
|
|
Cons:
|
AF slow in low light, heavy, IS expensive
|
|
|
I got this lens for indoor sports such as volleyball and basketball, along with portrait, wedding, and event photography. Canon L build quality has been great as always. The large f/2.8 max aperture has been fantastic for sports and the image quality has been wonderful as well. Before using lens for long shoots (4 hr football games etc), I never really realized just how heavy this lens is. This is no general purpose carry lens, and the quality is paid for in size and conspicuousness. The IS has been a great feature for some of my wedding and portrait shots indoors and in low light, though I must admit that the extra weight and $600 more for the IS version of this lens probably wouldn't be necessary if I'd just use a portable monopod. AF is almost always incredibly fast and accurate, though in low light the lens slows down the AF and has a tendency to hunt a bit. The lens also works well with a 1.4x TC, though there is some slight image quility loss that goes away after around f/5.6. In short, you get what you pay for with this lens...but you pay a lot. Unless you really know you need the IS and the fast aperture the 2.8 non IS and f/4 versions of this lens all performed equally as well w/ AF speed and image quality. I have also seen excellent results with the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 and 100-300 EX, though built quality and customer service lead me to the Canon.
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2005
|
|
thequickad
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 17, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 10
|
|
Review Date: Nov 22, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,659.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
IS, build quality, f/2.8, USM, picture quality
|
|
Cons:
|
weight, not bad using monopod
|
|
|
I switched form the non-IS model to the IS model. The IS is absolutely amazing. Now 90% of my pictures are great and I even got a clear shot handholding at 1/3 sec (70mm). IS is definitely worth the $.
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
352
|
725835
|
Feb 6, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
91% of reviewers
|
$3,248.85
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.82
|
8.18
|
9.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
