about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: Wren  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Wren to your Buddy List
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

ef_24-70_28u_1_
Review Date: Nov 16, 2005 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros:
Cons:

I would not consider the EF 24-105 f/4L an upgrade. It would be a downgrade. Why? A f/2.8L is always better than an f/4.

 
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

ef17-40_4l_1_
Review Date: Oct 4, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: Classic "L" build. Good Color/Contrast.
Cons:
Barrel distortion at wide mm. The reason I bought this lens is to shoot WIDE angle. I already own the 24-70L. Wasted my money thinking I could capture architectural shots. F/4 - too slow. Unusuable on lowlight conditions.

I must say.. after reading a lot of raving reviews on this lens, Im very disappointed. This lens is way overrated. I think a lot of first time "L" buyers are smitten because they own an "L". I have other "L" lenses as well, ( 24-70, 70-200 ) but this one did not deliver. I don't know if I got a bad copy, but I just had to return it. I wanted a wide-angle zoom lens but the barrel distortion at 17mm is really bad. I opted for the ef-s 10-22 instead. I paid more money for this ef-s lens, but worth it. The barrel distortion even at 12 or 14 mm is minimal.

 
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

EF10-22
Review Date: Sep 27, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Light and W-I-D-E! Nice colors and contrast. Almost has an "L" quality to it. Well built. It's a fun lens to own if you have a 1.6x crop camera.
Cons:
Cost more than an EF-17-40L which comes with hood and pouch.

I have the EF 24-70 f/2.8L lens. I love it -- but on occasions like architecture, interiors, and landscapes, it's not wide enough. I debated between the EF 17-40L and this lens. When I took test shots in the camera store, the ef-s proved to be the lens I'm looking for ( 16-35 equivalent on FF ). I bought it and no regrets. If you're looking for w-i-d-e this is the one. I like that this lens is light in weight, but felt solid. Highly recommended.

 
Canon EOS 20D

20d
Review Date: Sep 17, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Fast, well built magnesium alloy camera. This camera is awesome! Works perfectly with my EF 24-70 f/2.8L lens!
Cons:
It's more wishful thinking....would love to have it as a 1.3 crop sensor.



 
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

ef_24-70_28u_1_
Review Date: Nov 7, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Solid construction, quality images, sharp/contrast is great.
Cons:
AT first I thought the weight was an issue, but got over it quick.

I replaced my EF-S 17-85IS for this lens. Granted, It's twice the price, but it's worth it. I just love this lens--- it's my new "walkaround"lens!!

 
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM

EF17-85
Review Date: Oct 28, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $549.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Flexible range, IS a big plus specially on dim lighting, Good clear pictures. Works well with 20D
Cons:

I recently purchased the EF-S 17-85 IS lens as an upgrade from the base "kit", EF-S 18-55mm that it came with. It is definitely an improvement. The clarity of the pictures and color is different from the 18-55. I went to the camera shop today and took pictures using the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM and the quality of the EF-S 17-85 is not that much different. I am basing this of course from my computer screen. I did not have the chance to print any of the images. The color sharpness and the construction of the EF-24-70mm is better. I was ready to exchange the 17-85 IS for it but when I went home to compare the two, the difference was not that great for me to add the extra $700.00. I bought the 70-200mm F/4 instead. I think now that I have the right 'gear" to explore this new world of DSLR. I plan on taking lots of pictures this weekend! For an amateur and photo enthusiast, I would recommend this lens.I am enjoying it's versatility. I think this will be my 'carry on" lens for a while.