How can people call 85/1.8 and 200/2.8L(!) sleepers? Those are one of the mostly used and praised lenses!
Having said that, I don't see that many of them. Canon lenses are either really good and frequently used, or sit on the shelf, used once in a while, given a friendly smile and pock in the shoulder, and ... put back on the shelf.
Interesting as a number of posts deal with decisions I have and will be making ...
I recently purchased a 50-200L - very nice sharpness and colour contrast and like the poster said provides excellent coverage with my 17-40L.
I've just purchased a used 100/2 and am hoping I'll be satisfied enough that I'll sell my 135L to free up some cash. My interest in this range is primarily for indoor sports.
I do feel the sleeper is the 50/1.8 mk2 - cheaply built but incredible value. If one is going to get one prime for special lowish light conditions with little anticipated use this is it.
PhotoHound wrote:
The 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM (metal mount) is a heck of a lens for its range and price, great quality and very sharp.
Hear, hear! This is a wonderful lens that can be had for less than $200. The fact that it hasn't been mentioned until the 3rd page even sort of demonstrates it's often overlooked.
Yet another vote for the 50mm 2.5 macro but I gotta tell Y'all; the 17-85 IS gets my big vote. Killer lens, great color saturation, nice bokeh if opened up.
Cops a hammering around here, but I continue to be impressed by it. Used it (again) last week for some tight interior shots and it delivered above and beyond...
20-35/3.5-4.5 USM : very good optics, fast focusing, cheap.
28-105/3.5-4.5 USM : My first "real" zoom with my EOS-5, delivered sharp and nice looking images every time.
70-210/3.5-4.5 USM : It's faster than the 100-300 and has better optics.
How I wish canon would make a 28-105 equivalent for 1.6x cameras. What's wrong with them? We're stuck with the dog 18-55 or the expensive 17-85.
sharp, fast, no external moving parts. an absolute joy to use.
I am in love with this lens, closest thing to L glass I own atm.
I was a bit surprised that no one mentioned it here, but I guess not everyone is a fan of picking up a lens that will only work on a few of the digital cameras from the canon line up.
I think after the numerous threads about the 35/1.4, 85/1.2, 85/1.8, 135/2, Leica/Zeiss glass etc. we will see a lot of threads about the 135/2.8SF as the new hot thing
For $100 CAD, the 50mm 1.8 plastic (highly breakable if you're butterfingers like me) produces amazingly sharp pictures... its the most direct way to convince anyone of the value of prime lenses, and is a must-have for any starting kit.
If you get a sharp copy, the 17-85 IS is a great all-purpose lense too. I've seen quite a bit of variation in output (we compared 3 peoples lenses side by side) so it all depends if you have a 'sharp' copy. Make no mistakes though... a 'sharp' 17-85 at the wide angel can come very close to a 17-40L but it won't match it.
