Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX APO IF HSM
|
|
Review Date: Jun 12, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $800.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Great value, nice handling, decent AF
|
|
Cons:
|
Not "L" quality, frequent trips to repair dept
|
|
|
Good lens for the money. Very nice color and contrast, sharpness is not "L" quality but is very good.
I think the color was actually better than my 70-200 2.8L IS but the canon is sharper and has IS.
You can get some great deals on this lens used and even new it is a great value.
|
|
|
|
|
Sigma 17-35 mm f2.8-4.0 EX DG HSM
|
|
Review Date: Jun 12, 2007
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $800.00
| Rating: 2
|
|
Pros:
|
comes with a good soft case
|
|
Cons:
|
soft soft soft.
|
|
|
I have used several copies and seen results from others and this lens helped me convert to the "L" series.
The images were soft at almost every f stop and color was poor. Bad distortion problems. Most images were barely usable.
I would not reccomend this to anyone but the most casual shooter who has no concerns with image quality.
|
|
|
|
|
Sigma 105mm f2.8 EX Macro 1:1 Lens
|
|
Review Date: Jun 12, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $359.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
SHARP SHARP SHARP great price
|
|
Cons:
|
slow AF for portraits
|
|
|
From a Canon "L" guy who usually looks down his nose at Sigma stuff, I have to admit this is one heck of a sharp lens. I have never heard of anyone complain about it.
Makes a great portrait lens if you don't mind the slower AF which is par for macros.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L
|
|
Review Date: Jun 12, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
One of a kind Good focal length, sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
price
|
|
|
I had heard all the talk about the softness of this lens but I have had nothing but sharp and contrasty images. It compares very favorably with my 17-40L which is very very sharp.
Not a lens for everyone, if you don't know what you're doing you can get some bad images, but leveled up and square it is a great lens. I do wish it were a bit wider maybe 20mm at least for interiors.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
|
|
Review Date: Jun 10, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
good zoom range acceptable sharpness, great IS, light weight
|
|
Cons:
|
not 2.8. pricey for what it is , not as sharp as other L lenses
|
|
|
I enjoyed the focal length and the great IS for weddings and portraits. The BOKEH at 105 f4 is same as 70mm @2.8 due to telephoto compression. The AF was usually perfect.
My copy, which was very sharp around f8, was not spectacular at 4-5.6. The slow f4 was aggravating in low light and so I went with 24-70 2.8.
I miss the lightweight feel of the 24-105 and the IS but the 24-70 is sharper and of course faster.
I hope Canon will came out with a 24-105 2.8 L that is a true "L" lens. Until then I am sticking with the 24-70.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
|
|
Review Date: May 31, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Razor sharp. Great color and contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
doesn't have the prestige of the 85 1.2L
|
|
|
This is likely the most lens I have ever got for the money. Incredible sharp and contrasty. Similar performance to my L series lenses and sharper than some L zooms. Very good performance at 1.8 even better at 2.8-5.6.
|
|
|
|
|
