 |
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
|
|
Review Date: Mar 25, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,300.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Superman-solid build, nice optics, weathersealing is a plus.
|
|
Cons:
|
Price.
|
|
|
After some disappointment with the much less expensive Tamron 17-35mm zoom (soft & distorted edges, not as contrasty as I'd like, some CA), I bit the bullet and stepped up to Canon's latest 16-35 offering.
Is it perfect? No, but a heck of a lot better than the Tamron, and though certainly less bang-for-the-buck. I feel the image quality is worth the almost $1,000 premium, and looking back at the shots captured with the Tammy I wish I would have spent the extra money sooner.
|
|
|
|
|
Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 EX DG HSM
|
|
Review Date: Jan 16, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
GREAT color and contrast (like it more than my L lenses), built like a tank, works well with Sigma 1.4x TC.
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy, mounted on a 1D you're well over ten pounds of camera.
|
|
|
Can't beat it for the money, heck might not be able to beat it for twice the money. It's heavy and my arm cringes when I pull it out of the bag, but WOW the 120-300 captures some gorgeous images. Not much else to say...highly recommended.
Makes me want a Sigmonster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
