Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
|
|
Review Date: Oct 1, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $708.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Nice wide angle. Fairly compact and light.
|
|
Cons:
|
Slight softness in corners
|
|
|
Very nice lens. I like the wide view - would be slightly happier if the sharpness was more consistent, but it's really rather good. A nice addition to the collection.
|
|
|
|
|
Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX APO IF HSM
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $821.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very solid build, nice balance, excellent quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Slightly slow(er) focusing
|
|
|
This is a lovely lens. Crisp and sharp. The lens does take a moment to focus, but nothing intolerable by any means. It's hardly fair comparing a $200 90-300 lens to this, but nonetheless, I was exceptionally happy I traded it in.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $395.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Beautiful crispness at the right depths of field, very fast focus.
|
|
Cons:
|
A little soft at 1.8 and below
|
|
|
I like this lens a lot. I want to get an 85mm, but for now this is my primary portrait lens. It's nice and crisp, very little aberration. A good midrange prime.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,494.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Lovely sharpness. Good range. Nice build quality. Sturdy.
|
|
Cons:
|
Is it greedy to wish it went down to 17mm?
|
|
|
I love this lens. It's my primary tool. A good range, and nice and solid. Big and solid, without being overly weighty and annoying when around the neck.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $598.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
A good 'entry' level lens with a nice range, particularly on 1.6x crop bodies.
|
|
Cons:
|
Let down by chromatic aberration particularly at wide angles.
|
|
|
This was the first lens I got with my camera and it served me well. Decently wide, and with more range than the 17-55 offering. Chromatic aberration and fringing were noticeable at times - easily correctible in post processing, but still.
Nonetheless, definitely a decent midrange lens.
|
|
|
|
|
