 |
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
|
|
Review Date: Apr 9, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,300.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent Build. FAST Lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy (read long comment in Post)
|
|
Just returned from a 4-month trip to South America. I carried a 5D body, the 24-70/2.8 and an old 75-300/4-5.6 lens. The 75-300 was used when I needed the long range to shoot wildlife. 95% of the time the 24-70 was on the 5D. Much as I would have loved to get the 24-105/4.0, I wanted the speed this lens provided and it did not disappoint.
I would love to see canon come out with a 24-105/2.8. Assume it is of a good quality and costs less than $2000, that would be the SINGLE lens I would own.
After 4-months of having the lens in your backpack or on your neck, you develop a stoop! I dread to think what state I will be reduced to once I get the 70-200/2.8 lens 
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
|
|
Review Date: Apr 5, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,700.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Good Solid Lens
|
|
Cons:
|
Interference Banding ??
|
|
|
Hello all. I have some queries on this lens. I did rent the lens over the past weekend and shot 4-rolls. While waiting for the slides and prints to be processed, I was reading about "interference banding". (on the EOS-30D)
When and Why does this happen? More importantly, does the 70-200 IS / USM 2.8 suffer from "interference banding"?
Does this Interference banding applying to FILM cameras (or) Only digital SLRs ?
If indeed, this lens does suffer from "interference banding", are there ways to get around it? (Do I need to use it only with FILM SLRs and not Digital, shoot at certain speeds etc)
Since there are many of you who have used this lens for a long time, I was hoping for some clarity on this issue.
If it helps avoid clutter on this site, you can reply directly to me at 'vgopalk@hotmail.com'.
Thank You all.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
|
|
Review Date: Mar 8, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Maybe I am missing something here. How can DUST get through to the CCD sensor because of the lens?
Be it a film or a digital camera, shouldn't the light rays be the only ones to pass through the lens and reach the focal plane containing the film or the sensor?
I can understand that dust will collect between the outer and inner cylinders of the lens (whether the lens is a rotating zoom or a push-pull zoom). How will it reach the sensors? (unless the user decides to CHANGE the lens during a dust storm!)
I realize that this is not a review per-se, but more to understand what the reviewers are talking about.
For those interested in corresponding to me directly, the address is vgopalk@hotmail.com
Thank You
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
