about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: mudlake  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mudlake to your Buddy List
Canon EF 35mm f/2

ef35mmf2_1_
Review Date: Mar 28, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $219.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Light, fast, sharp
Cons:
none.

I purchased this last week for a family shoot that I knew it would be perfect for. After shooting 200 frames with this lens, I can tell you that it will be on my 10D the vast majority of the time now. It is extremely sharp at f2.8 and smaller and very sharp at f2.

The close-focusing feature is just a bonus. Autofocus is fast enough for my purposes and the high-pitched whine of the motor isn't any problem (stuff like that doesn't bother me as long as a lens is sharp and colorful and focuses fast). Contrast is nice too and I like the colors. The focal lenght on a 10D is just perfect - not too long and not too short. Canon has a winner in this fine little lens.


 
Canon EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

ef20_35mm_1_
Review Date: Mar 9, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $215.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Light, sharp
Cons:
Not as contrasty as the 17-40

I bought this lens to take the place of my 17-40L. I upgraded my tripod and ballhead and so the 17-40 had to go to help pay for it. I tested this lens against my 17-40 and found it to be almost as sharp, but not as contrasty. The 17-40L images had better color and contrast. However, I got my 20-35 for the great price of $215, and for that price this lens it fantastic!

I shoot it almost exclusively for landscapes at f/16 or smaller. At those apertures, the images out of this lens are just as sharp as those from the 17-40, but again, show slightly less contrast. This isn't a concern since I can equalize this in Photoshop. If you can find a good used one of these lenses, it is quite a lens for the money. Here's a shot from last week:

http://mudlake.smugmug.com/photos/16954640-O.jpg


 
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

ef17-40_4l_1_
Review Date: Oct 22, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $600.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: High quality build, full time manual focus, quick focusing, very nice contrast and sharpness. Smooth in every way.
Cons:
F4 maximum aperture. I would like f2.8 but I don't want to pay for it!

I purchased this lens mainly to use as a landscape lens on my 10D. The widest lens I have owned was the Canon 24/2.8. Seeing 17mm on my 10D for the first time was exciting! I thought, "why didn't I buy this sooner?" I haven't taken it off my camera since.

Everything about this lens is quality. Very sharp at f4 and even better stopped down. It is not heavy or obtrusive and fits nicely on the 10D. The contrast is fantastic. Not as good as the 85/1.8 or 135/2, but very good for a wide angle lens.

I think I've found my new favorite lens! Highly recommended. I can't wait to use it on a full frame camera.


 
Canon EF 28mm f/2.8

ef28mmf_28_1_
Review Date: Mar 30, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $159.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Very small and light, super sharp at f2.8
Cons:
buzzy autofocus motor (but who cares?)

I just got this lens yesterday and played with it most of the evening. All I can say about its sharpness at f2.8 is - YES! Very sharp wide open and a dandy little lens to carry around. If you're like me and don't like to carry around 2 pounds or more of metal and glass while you're making images, you will love this lens. It is truly a joy to use.

I will play with it more over the next several days at all apertures but from the 100 or so images I have taken so far I am very impressed. High quality, low price, and flyweight to boot. Highly recommended.

I bought the lens hood for and extra $20. Not only does it protect the lens, but it prevents flare from unwanted light.


 
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

ef70_200_4_1_
Review Date: Mar 25, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $539.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Small, light, sharp, colorful, light, small, and not to mention light :)
Cons:
none

I have bought and sold many lenses over the past 5 years, but this is one that will always stay in my bag. The only thing that would make me sell this lens is if Canon came out with an IS version under $800.

I owned the 70-200/2.8 IS for a short while. After shooting with that lens for some time, I took it off and put on my f/4. Whoa!!!!!! Talk about a HUGE difference in size and weight! The little f/4 felt like a dream. I couldn't believe the difference in feel. I ended up selling the 2.8 IS for financial reasons but don't really feel too bad about it since I fell in love with my little f/4 all over again.

This lens is sharp at all apertures and gives nice bokeh. Colors are very nice as well as contrast. I love seeing the images on my screen. They have a certain "look" to them that is very pleasing.

I think Canon would be doing itself a favor if they put IS in this lens and sold it for $800 or less. I think they would sell thousands and thousands. But until that day (crossing my fingers), this lens will remain my favorite lens and one that I don't hesitate to take anywhere because of its small size. Highly recommended.