|
|
Manuel Barrera
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 28, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 12
|
|
Review Date: Oct 7, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid quick focus on my 1D becomes a 26mm lens
|
|
Cons:
|
soft corners
|
|
This is a solid 8 camera, don't have any photos online presently to demonstrate but this youtube video slideshow was shot entirely with the lens on a 1D camera. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NguZe2Vwb-M hope the link works
|
|
 Oct 7, 2009
|
|
Haring
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 11, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Sep 11, 2009
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $250.00
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
cheap
|
|
Cons:
|
everything
|
|
Don't even think about it. What a disappointment.
The picture quality is just lifeless....:(:(:( It is better to keep the kit lens!
I sold it and bought a Canon 24L. What a big difference.
You can see a few pictures in the portfolio for real estate properties:
www.haringphotography.com
|
|
|
Sep 11, 2009
|
|
UsaFromAbove
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 11, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 11, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
small
|
|
Cons:
|
lack of detail, not sharp
|
|
I used it to shoot from an elevated angle. The result were disappointing.....I paid $300 but I don't think it is even worth more than $100 to tell you the truth.
The colors are lifeless, "burnt-out". There are no details on the images. You can see the samples on my site: www.usafromabove.com Look for the huge house with the red roof. You will see what I am talking about. Normally, I use the 17-40 L on my elevated system. I thoguht the 20mm would be a good replacement even if it not as good as the 17 40. I think even the 18-55 Canon kit lens produces better images. Add a few hundred bucks and buy a decent lens.
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2009
|
|
perrycas
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 5, 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 5, 2009
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
not too big. reasonable speed. I dont notice too much chromatic ab.
|
|
Cons:
|
detail/sharpness is poor
|
|
'Not Happy Narrelle!'
I guess it depends on what you are comparing it too. I bought a low mileage 5d last year and 3 primes. To replace my Mamiya M6. The 20mm I am comparing to my 65mm Schnieder K mounted on a 612 camera. The Canon 20mm doesn't compete well. Faster, yes, but sharpness and distortion is pretty awful. Maybe i am making an unfair comparison, maybe i got a bad example. Perhaps I have been spoilt, but if it costs this much to get into 'good' digital it's a bit disapointing.
|
|
|
Jun 5, 2009
|
|
seattlesteve
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 1, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 194
|
|
Review Date: May 8, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast AF, USM, well built for a non-L, contrast and color, wide on a ff body, compact
|
|
Cons:
|
Slightly expensive
|
|
I was a little apprehensive to purchase this lens after reading so many conflicting reviews. I went ahead with the purchase and only regret not picking up this lens earlier. Shooting wide open is completely acceptable as far as sharpness, however, I think sharpness is generally over-hyped. I'd recommend this lens to a friend.
|
|
|
May 8, 2009
|
|
Tom Moore
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 8, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 118
|
|
Review Date: Sep 18, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Versatile, well put together, good IQ
|
|
Cons:
|
Only typical WA probs - sharpness wideopen in corners
|
|
A solid performer. I used this lens exclusively whilst travelling and found it to be very versatile, whether for portraits of my friends or architecture shots this lens was excellent. It's relatively small size also meant it fits in a small camera holder, perfect for travelling!
|
|
|
Sep 18, 2008
|
|
HMZRHS
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 10, 2007
Location: Brunei
Posts: 62
|
|
Review Date: Aug 21, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Its Prime,good for outdoor.and indoor(flash)
|
|
Cons:
|
You can see purple colour the edges
|
|
Sample by using EF20mm /f8 attached to EOS 1Ds MKIII
http://dastar.shutterchance.com/photoblog/Low_Tide_/
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2008
|
|
odoland
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 30, 2008
Location: Denmark
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: May 11, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Nice build, good for landscapes
|
|
Cons:
|
Well, it could have better corner performance on FF, but so could most WA lenses.
|
|
I bought this lens way back in 2003 for my 10D. Never was that impressed with it, but it served me well as my only lens below 50 mm.
Last two years it has been on my 5D. I find it way more usefull on a FF camera. I had heard all the negatives about the corner performance before getting 5D, and it will vignette a bit at f/2.8. I did a test shot at maybe 10 meters distance, and my copy is really sharp wide open in center. Corners are not that great wide open, but compared to pictures I've seen from other users, mine seems good. At f/8 the corners are still not great.
I use mine for landscapes and other close up stuff, and use it mostly at f/11-f/16. If the corners are within DOF, they will look fine on my 5D.
|
|
|
May 11, 2008
|
|
MJRP
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 17, 2007
Location: France
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 17, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Compact & light
|
|
Cons:
|
Very noisy AF
|
|
I was looking for a discret fixed focal lens for street and people photography. That was the main reason why I bought this lens, cause I already have a (big) bright zoom which covers the 24mm.
Well, as everybody said, the lens is small and build quality is OK. But the detail which really sucks is the noisy AF motor. It's really noisy !
|
|
|
Dec 17, 2007
|
|
Peter twohey
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 21, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 118
|
|
Review Date: Nov 5, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
IQ,Build quality,USM.
|
|
Cons:
|
Lack of hood.
|
|
There seems to be some very divergent opinions about this lens and where I see review scores varying from 2-10 it would lead me to suspect a QC problem and a batch of bad lenses at some point in production.To me there seems little point in reviewing a bad copy-so send it back and get a good one.Equally if you bought second hand-then try before you buy.
I would therefore propose to ignore those really low scores-and look to the rest for a realistic view of this lens.Bizarrely two of the most complimentary reviews have only scored it 6 and 7 apiece!
Nevertheless everyone seems to agree that this lenses strong points are 1/Sharpness 2/Colour 3/Contrast 4/Build quality and 5/Fast and accurate A/F-a pretty impressive list for any lens
Equally everyone seems to agree on the cons.1/Price 2/No hood 3/Soft edges and some CA (particularly full frame).Well the lack of hood is a perennial beef with Canon and the price is not too dissimiliar with the Sigma and for a lens of high build quality and USM, that seems reasonable value for money to me.Which leaves the soft edges and CA-- on a superwide prime-- pretty much to be expected and easily correctable in post.I shoot with a 40D crop body and these are non issues for me.
I really like this lens,it comes into its own in poor light and strong shadow.Images are crisp and sharp-colours clear and strong.I can thoroughly recommend this lens but definitely try before you buy.
|
|
|
Nov 5, 2007
|
|
gustabod
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 5, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Jun 15, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, great color, contrast, fast and accurate AF
|
|
Cons:
|
a bit costly, and have to buy the hood as well
|
|
An excellent lense, love using it. As always with Canon (and only Canon!!!!!) you have to pay for the hood, a 50 cent piece of plastic that sells for 30 bucks!
The range is useful in cropped and FF, certainly more than the 24 MM (it is "just" right on a 1.6x sensor like on the 30D).
I went with this instead of the also well regarded Sigma version, costs roughly comparable, but the Canon not as warm as the typical Sigma coating.
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2007
|
|
Thomaspin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 21, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 8
|
|
|
Jun 7, 2007
|
|
|
