Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM
|
|
Review Date: Dec 22, 2005
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $649.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Tack sharp, Lightning fast AF
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
This is an excellent lens. I sold my 70-200 f2.8 when I got this as the image quality just no longer held up.
I really have a hard time imagining what kind of an intellect it takes to buy a prime and then put down no zoom as a negative???? It is a prime for God's sake.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
|
|
Review Date: Nov 5, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $329.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast, Great in low light.
|
|
Cons:
|
Cheap hood that Canon sells to go on the lens
|
|
|
I bought this lens to shoot inside of poorly light gymnasiums to shoot volleyball and basketball. It works great for that. The only bad thing that I have discovered about this lens is the hood that Canon sells as an accessory. It is extremely flimsy and does not fit very snug.
Never can figure out why people purchase a non-L lens like this and then list a negative that it is a non-L. There is an L version so they could have purchased that one.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM
|
|
Review Date: Oct 28, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $659.95
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great lens. Photos really pop
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
This is a great lens. Not sure how you can find this lens wanting in anything for the price.
Certainly not sure how you can purchase a prime, non-IS lens and then put down that the cons are no zoom and no IS? Things that make you go HMMMM
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
|
|
Review Date: Sep 14, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,139.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build like a tank. Razor sharp photos. Easy to hand hold. Extremely well balanced.
|
|
Cons:
|
Cost, but I knew that
|
|
|
I love this lens. It takes great photos, even in low light. It is well balanced with the camera, which makes it easy to use hand held. Highly recomended. Just make sure you give it time to get used to the lens
|
|
|
|
|
