about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: Jay Adeff  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Jay Adeff to your Buddy List
Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

1ef200mmf_28_1_1_
Review Date: Feb 2, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $650.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Solid build quality. Very sharp at f/2.8. Fast AF. Small, light, and affordable.
Cons:
None

This is Canon's sleeper L lens. It is 99% as sharp as the 300 2.8L IS. I bought it to replace the 70-200 2.8L which was a huge dissapointment to me. The 200 prime is fantastically sharp at f/2.8. The AF is fast, silent, and accurate. One of my favorite lenses of all time.

 
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

ef17-40_4l_1_
Review Date: Feb 2, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $600.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Solid build quality. Sharp. Fast, smooth & quiet AF. Affordable.
Cons:
Hood is a bit much. I replaced it with the hood from the 24-105 which works great on a 1.3 crop camera.

Bought mine used and was pleasantly surprised to find it a great lens for the money. Can occasionaly be a tiny bit soft at f/4, but the lack of distortions (CA or otherwise) means a bit of USM in Photoshop sharpens the images up nicely.

 
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

ef_24-70_28u_1_
Review Date: Feb 2, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,400.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Solid build quality. Sharp.
Cons:
Big, heavy, & expensive.

I bought this lens to replace my broken Tamron 28-75. This lens has had a reputation for spotty quality control so I was a bit hesitant. I bought a new copy and found it to be very sharp, even at f/2.8. The AF is fast and accurate on my 1D-MkII. If price, weight, and size are an issue, go for the Tamron. If you want the best lens overall, get the Canon.

 
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

ef70-200_28lisu_1_
Review Date: Feb 2, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: Solid build. Smooth quiet AF. Effective IS. Constant f/2.8 aperture. Impress-your-friends styling.
Cons:
Soft at f/2.8, particularly at 200mm. AF not as fast as prime lenses. Not as sharp as prime lenses. Expensive for what you get.

I've owned, rented, and borrowed several copies of this lens with always the same result. Soft at f/2.8, particularly at 200mm. You have to stop it down to f/4 to get good results. I finally replaced mine with the 200mm f/2.8L II which is much sharper. If you really need an f/2.8 zoom, there's no other option. Yes, it's a staple of every news/sports photographer in the business, but many still hate it none-the-less. Hopefully the new version is an improvement.