 |
Canon EF 20mm f/2.8 USM
|
|
Review Date: Mar 11, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
relatively light, fits well with my 300D, affordable wide angle on 1,6 crop
|
|
Cons:
|
Even though it is a prime, I find that 2,8 is often not enough for indoors, ergo 2,0 eller more would be nice.
|
|
I bought this lens used cheaply, and I am very happy with it. I was searching for a equivalent 28mm prime for my 300D, and this was the best I could find. The Sigma 20 1,8, a lens that I have never tried, didn't have USM so that made me pick the Canon. If I had the money, I would swap it for a 16-35L, but that wont happen anytime soon. 
I use this lens and the 35 2,0 90% of the time on my camera. I would recommend this lens to anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 35mm f/2
|
|
Review Date: Nov 28, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
light, small, sharp wide open, very usable focal length, reasonable price
|
|
Cons:
|
loud! no USM (slow focus), crappy and expensive lens hood
|
|
|
I have this lens on my camera most of the time. I bought it with the lens hood and an UV filter for $200 in Nagoya, Japan. That's a bargain! I agree with many users that the biggest problem with this lens is that it's too loud. For the price it should have been USM.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
|
|
Review Date: Jul 11, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $75.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
light weight, price, excellent quality, perfect portrait lens
|
|
Cons:
|
loud focus
|
|
|
I love this lens! To me, this is the best second lens you can get on a tight budget. As many people have said - images are soft at f/1,8, but sharp at f/2,8. Even though I have used this as a portrait lens due to the longer focal length (80mm), I miss having a "real" 50mm lens. I think that there should be a EF-s 31mm - equivalent of a normal 50mm lens. Does anyone argree? Anyway - a very good lens!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
