 |
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM
|
|
Review Date: Jan 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Colors, contrast, fast aperture.
|
|
Cons:
|
Slightly slower AF.
|
|
|
I purchased it from B&H in December and I've been using it for a while. I knew that it was an amazing lens - I owned it when it just came out, but returned it since I felt that the price of nearly $2200 was too much for it. Nowadays, it's priced less than $1800 with potential $100 Canon rebate (double) makes it a no-brainer to me. Love the fit of the lens on 5D (with grip) and how it feels. If you're doing a lot of portraits or low-light - buy it. If you're having hard-time justifying paying almost 5 times more than f/1.8, buy the 1.8 one - from what I've heard/read - great lens. I never owned one, so I can't speak to it.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM
|
|
Review Date: Sep 6, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Most versatile lens one can get. Build quality, range, quality of the images. Did I mention versatility :-)
|
|
Cons:
|
Push/pull is something to get used to. It's not light by any stretch of imagination.
|
|
|
Own this lens for almost a year and love it. I heard it all: heavy, slow, expensive, makes your SLR into point-shoot, etc. Here is my conclusion: use whatever suites your needs. If you don't mind the weight and push-pull focusing (it took me a couple of days to get used to) - it's a fine piece of glass. It appears that pros get hooked on 2-3 lenses and use them consistently. I'm not a pro by any stretch of imagination, but I found having this lens on my 5D really suffices my needs most (not all) of the time. I had the 24-70, 70-200 IS, and others. They're amazing lenses, but I find my 28-300L indispensable for me. When I hear "slow" or "push/pull" being a problem from the same people who admire 100-400L it sounds slightly hypocritical. When I hear "expensive", my question is: what do you want to pay for a lens covering you from 28mm to 300mm?
Don't want ot make it overly long. If you're on the fence - buy it. If you don't want to carry many lenses on you all the time - buy it. If you're a perfectionist and want to have all primes in your arsenal - this lens is not for you.
Thank for reading.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
|
|
Review Date: Dec 3, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,600.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, fast, built like a tank.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
|
As I finally got myself into DSLR photography, I decided to purchase a decent glass. I contemplated for a while about purchasing 28-300L, 24-70L, 28-135 and this baby.
28-300 fell off my radar due to push-pull (some people love it on 100-400L, but it just didn't do it for me). Also lack of rebate on it perhaps added another 10% to the decision.
24-70L - excellent glass and I imagine that I'll get it at some point once I really feel that there is a gap using my 70-200L IS.
28-135 - wasn't "L" though for the price, reputation and all-around zoom makes it a very attactive walk-around lens.
After reading reviews and looking at all the options in B&H, I made a call to go with this glass and have on the body all the time for a while. Let me tell you, this lens worth every penny. I have taken pictures indoor and outdoor and all are extremely sharp. As a matter of a fact, friend of mine who has a lot of high-end Canon glass, decided to add this to his collection after taking a few shots with it.
The built is phenomenal. I enjoy taking it out of the bag ieven if I'm not shooting just to appreciate the art of it.
Hope you found this useful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
