about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: 20Dshooter  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add 20Dshooter to your Buddy List
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

ef70-200_28lisu_1_
Review Date: Jun 20, 2005 Recommend? | Price paid: $1,600.00

 
Pros: Everything it is touted to be!
Cons:
Huge and heavy, and of couurse, very expensive. The IS in my lens caused the infamous lock-up problems after 1/2 year usage.

Up until recently, I was a delighted owner of a superb lens. Everything positive you read about this lens was true. But then, the dreaded lock-up problems began. It is where, with the IS function engaged, the aperture reads "00," and then the camera locks up. I would need to remove then, replace the lens in order for the camera to resume working - but only without IS.

I now have a wonderful 70-200 2.8L non-IS, that I paid $1600 for. Had I wanted the non-IS version, I would have gotten the Sigma. I am really bummed. And because I need this lens, I can't afford the time it will be away at a repair center for.

Trouble with this lens is, that you can't test it for this problem after purchase like you'd test any other lens for it's own rumored problems. Anyone this has happened to, it has occured only a while after purchase.

So, should you decide you need IS, then good luck! The odds are quite likely low, but you never know, unfortunately. One would think that at this price, Canon could actually get it right...


 
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

ef_24-70_28u_1_
Review Date: Jun 19, 2005 Recommend? | Price paid: $1,200.00

 
Pros: Built like a tank. Very fast AF.
Cons:
Big. Heavy. Expensive. Wide open, this lens is softish. It does get better at f/4, and is sharp at 5.6, but at it's price range, I shouldn't be getting rubbish from Canon.

I do all my work at 2.8, and this lens is a big disapointment. It is merely "okay," but certainly not what I've been led to believe. Some will probably say that I got a bad copy, but at $1200 that is totally unacceptable. More like scandalous!

Why this lens has to be the size and weight it is, is beyond me, considering that Sigma and Tamron produce equivalent versions of this lens practically optically equal to the Canon L, but much smaller and lighter.

Thumbs down for Canon,
A disillusioned L user.


 
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

ef_24-70_28u_1_
Review Date: Jun 18, 2005 Recommend? | Price paid: $1,200.00

 
Pros: Built like a tank, very fast AF.
Cons:
Wide open is acceptable, getting better at f/4 and smaller. Very large and very heavy and way too expensive.

I do all my work at 2.8, and this lens was a big disapointment. It is merely "okay," but certainly not what I've been led to believe. Some will probably say that I got a bad copy, but at $1200 that is totally unaccaeptable. More like scandalous!

Why this lens has to be the size and weight it is, is beyond me, considering that Sigma and Tamron produce equivalent versions of this lens practically optically equal to the Canon L, but much smaller and lighter.

Thumbs down for Canon,
A disillusioned L user.


 
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

ef_24-70_28u_1_
Review Date: Jun 18, 2005 Recommend? | Price paid: $1,200.00

 
Pros: Built like a tank, very fast AF.
Cons:
Wide open is acceptable, getting better at f/4 and smaller. Very large and very heavy and way too expensive.

I do all my work at 2.8, and this lens was a big disapointment. It is merely "okay," but certainly not what I've been led to believe. Some will probably say that I got a bad copy, but at $1200 that is totally unaccaeptable. More like scandalous!

Why this lens has to be the size and weight it is, is beyond me, considering that Sigma and Tamron produce equivalent versions of this lens practically optically equal to the Canon L, but much smaller and lighter.

Thumbs down for Canon,
A disillusioned L user.


 
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

ef70-200_28lisu_1_
Review Date: Jun 18, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 1 

 
Pros:
Cons:



 
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

ef_24-70_28u_1_
Review Date: Jun 18, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 4 

 
Pros: Stopped down to f/4 and smaller, it can produce some nice shots. Built like a tank and very fast AF.
Cons:
A huge amount of money to spend on a huge, heavy piece of glass, which is, at best, only mediocre.

A dissapointment. My Sigma 15-30 performs way better than this lens. Okay, I might have gotten a bad copy, but at this price point, one would think you should'nt have to worry about such things. Thumbs down for Canon.

 
Sigma Electronic Flash EF 500 DG Super

EF_500_DG_Super_Flash
Review Date: Jun 18, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $180.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Light, powerful, full of features and cheap.
Cons:
Haven't come across any.

A superb flash. I love it, have used it at weddings. I really can't think of anything bad about it, at all.

Recently, I had the opportunity to try out a friends 550EX. That flash is much heavier than the Sigma, and, of course, much more expensive, but otherwise is pretty much the same.

Highly reccomended!


 
Sigma 15-30mm f3.5-4.5 EX Aspherical DG DF

15_30f35_45_1_
Review Date: Jun 18, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $600.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Wide, well built, extremely sharp!
Cons:
Audible, scratchy sounding AF.

I absolutely love this lens! It is way sharper than my other L zooms, such as the "legendar" 24-70 L and 70-200 IS. I never have to use USM with shots taken with this gem!

The only con is the scratchy sounding, relatively loud AF. However, this is really no big deal, as the focussing is always very fast. It doesn't bother me at all.