 |
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
|
|
Review Date: Sep 9, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $560.00
| Rating: 1
|
|
Pros:
|
Light weight comparing with f 2.8; good optics; good color rendition.
|
|
Cons:
|
Consistant back-focus on 20D; white color to be conspicuous;
|
|
|
I bought this lens + 20d and 17-40mm for my trip to Hawaii last year. As I came back home checking out the photos, I found almost 75% of photos taken by 70-200mm f4 are out of focus to some degree, while almost all photos taken by 17-40mm are nice and sharp. After reading some posts at dpreview, I figured the 70-200m f4 often back-focus on 20d. I sent the lens and body back to Canon New Jersey factory to calibrate. And It came back unchanged. I was totally frustrated with Canon's servise. I bought a Canon 70-300mm IS f4-5.6 lately, it performs way over my expectation. Focus is alway dead on, at 200mm f5 it generates super sharp images. So if you are making decision between the 70-200 f4 and 70-300 IS, I'd say go with the black one.
|
|
|
|
|
Sigma 24-60mm f2.8 EX DG Lens
|
|
Review Date: Jan 6, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $290.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
small, light, great optic, well built, very good AF, great color rendition.
|
|
Cons:
|
f2.8 is not as sharp, but usable, zoom creeps, no MF overide.
|
|
|
The AF is not as fast as Canon, sometimes you need to try a few time to get a accurate focus. zoom ring is not as smooth as canon either. for the price, nothing to complain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
