 |
Canon EF 20-35mm f/2.8L
|
|
Review Date: Jun 28, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great lens. MY first "L" last year and it quickly became my favorite. Great, solid quality lens that performed flawlessly. Crisp and clear, even at F 2.8.
|
|
Cons:
|
AF was kinda noisy, but since the lens was pretty old, that was to be expected.
|
|
|
I used this lens for a solid year and it never failed. This is a great, "poor man's" version of the 17-40 "L". The only reason I got rid of it was I went wider, and ended up picking up a 24-70 zoom to be my workhorse lens.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
|
|
Review Date: Jun 22, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $380.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness at 5.6 and more open, IS rocks
|
|
Cons:
|
Not quite as clear wide open, but not many lenses are
|
|
|
I bought this lens from another FM'er. I shoot lots of zoom at weddings (either ceremony or candids) and wanted to be far away from the subjects to really capture the moment. I also like to shoot natural light and was pretty hesitatn only having F4, and 5.6 fully zoomed. I have shaky hands to begin with, so without IS these shots have never turned out.
I shoot with a lot of 2.8 glass, but since this lens has IS, I can slow down the shutter and still get lots of usable light.
I did a side by side with this lens and the 70-200L. At F4, the L wins in clarity. At 5.6 and 8, the two lenses are almost identical. Definitely identical to clients. At F11, the L starts to bring out more clarity again.
So, if you can't drop the $800+ for the L, buy this and PS a little saturation into your pics to mimic the L color.
I'm very pleased with this lens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
