This topic is in the 2006 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2006"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
p.5 #1"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
Both of mine are. If they weren't, I wouldn't have 'em.
Feb 15, 2006 at 10:35 AM
p.5 #2"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
My 300/4 IS has wowed me all 3 times that I've bought it!
Feb 15, 2006 at 10:38 AM
p.5 #3"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
A lot of lenses have wowed me:
28-75mm Tamron, my very first lens. Wow I have a lens.
my second lens: Canon 50mm 1.8, wow this lens sux,
wowiest lens: Nikon 200mm f/2 VR, wow. Light, fast, image stabilized and just perfect.
28-75mm Tamron, my very first lens. Wow I have a lens.
my second lens: Canon 50mm 1.8, wow this lens sux,
wowiest lens: Nikon 200mm f/2 VR, wow. Light, fast, image stabilized and just perfect.
Feb 15, 2006 at 10:43 AM
p.5 #4"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
The only lens that have wowed my so far was the 85 1.2.
I have the 70-200, the 24-70, the 180 Macro, the 17-40, the 50 1.4 and the 85 1.8. Both 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 are extremely soft wide open IMO. The other are great lens, but don't have the wow factor IMO.
Now I'm getting tempted to get that 135 f/2...
Daschund
I have the 70-200, the 24-70, the 180 Macro, the 17-40, the 50 1.4 and the 85 1.8. Both 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 are extremely soft wide open IMO. The other are great lens, but don't have the wow factor IMO.
Now I'm getting tempted to get that 135 f/2...
Daschund
Feb 15, 2006 at 10:59 AM
p.5 #6"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
in no particular order...
85L
135L
CZ 1.4/85
i don't shoot wide too often but these lenses always make my jaw drop
Zuiko 3.5/21
CZ 2.8/28
85L
135L
CZ 1.4/85
i don't shoot wide too often but these lenses always make my jaw drop
Zuiko 3.5/21
CZ 2.8/28
Feb 15, 2006 at 12:10 PM
p.5 #7"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
When I was young in Canon system first WOW appear from Canon 100-400 IS ... then when I was experienced come another WOW from use of Canon 300mm 2.8 IS... now I am old Canon user... but there is one lens that gives me WOW all the time 200 f/1.8 L.
Feb 15, 2006 at 03:25 PM
p.5 #9"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
My 50 f/1.4 is good wow.
My 135L use to be the best wow even looking through the viewfinder..
My Takahashi FS-102 and 0.75 compressor is 600mm and f/6 of unbelievable wow. No chromatic abberation period, absolute zero even on the hardest targets. Oh, and sick contrast and colour rendition also.
But then with only 2 elements for the objective (front one fluorite) and 2 or 3 (not sure) for the compressor it should be.
Almost forgot to mention bokeh. Since it has a perfectly circular aperture stop there is no diffraction spiking as seen in most photographic lenses. The bokeh would equal or exceed any Canon L lens.
But then it doesn't have IS, AF or variable aperture.
My 135L use to be the best wow even looking through the viewfinder..
My Takahashi FS-102 and 0.75 compressor is 600mm and f/6 of unbelievable wow. No chromatic abberation period, absolute zero even on the hardest targets. Oh, and sick contrast and colour rendition also.
But then with only 2 elements for the objective (front one fluorite) and 2 or 3 (not sure) for the compressor it should be.
Almost forgot to mention bokeh. Since it has a perfectly circular aperture stop there is no diffraction spiking as seen in most photographic lenses. The bokeh would equal or exceed any Canon L lens.
But then it doesn't have IS, AF or variable aperture.
Feb 16, 2006 at 06:19 AM
p.5 #11"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
Present day, the Canon 70-200mm f4L.
The first wow was with a Canon 300mm f2.8 back in the late 1980's.
The first wow was with a Canon 300mm f2.8 back in the late 1980's.
Feb 16, 2006 at 12:14 PM
p.5 #12"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
If going by pictures people look at and saw "WOW" - the most "wow's" have come from the 85mm f1.2L only because of it's sharp & velvety look to the images.
The other lens that has wow'd people based on the image itself include unlikely suspects like the 14mm because the image was really really wide and contrasty and the 35mm L because it got the shot in very low light. Another unusual lens image that got me a "wow" was the 70-200 f4L for it's background blur, and the 35-350L for the rich color in the image.
What "wow's" me is the 85L - pictures taken in very low light, with a really nice blur effect is just amazing. The other lens is the 35-350L and sometimes even the 28-300L - the colors and the blur effect for lenses with not so large apertures is very nice.
The other lens that has wow'd people based on the image itself include unlikely suspects like the 14mm because the image was really really wide and contrasty and the 35mm L because it got the shot in very low light. Another unusual lens image that got me a "wow" was the 70-200 f4L for it's background blur, and the 35-350L for the rich color in the image.
What "wow's" me is the 85L - pictures taken in very low light, with a really nice blur effect is just amazing. The other lens is the 35-350L and sometimes even the 28-300L - the colors and the blur effect for lenses with not so large apertures is very nice.
Feb 16, 2006 at 04:10 PM
p.5 #13"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
My Sigma 10-20mm. The wide angle view was awesome.
Also, the Canon 100mm 2.8. I got that WOW feeling after I've learn how to use it. Weird lens but fun. Lost two hours in taken picture of backyard antz.
A lens never fail to impress me with it sharpness is the Sigma 100-300mm f/4 with or without the Sigma 1.4x converter.
Tony
Also, the Canon 100mm 2.8. I got that WOW feeling after I've learn how to use it. Weird lens but fun. Lost two hours in taken picture of backyard antz.
A lens never fail to impress me with it sharpness is the Sigma 100-300mm f/4 with or without the Sigma 1.4x converter.
Tony
Feb 16, 2006 at 04:28 PM
p.5 #14"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
I have taken wow photos with a $1700 lens, $400 lenses, and P&S cameras. I have taken ouch photos with the same. I think it is easier to shoot wow photos with certain lenses.
From a content perspective, I shoot a lot of wow photos with the 10-22mm lens for shots you just can't do with any other lens. It's wide and it's sharp.
From a quality perspective, the IS and sharpness of the 70-200 and the 24-105 help me make a higher percentage of wow photos. Most of my photos are hand held. They can help me make sharp vibrant photos.
From a "my that's a big lens" perspective, the 70-200 IS gets the win.
Maybe Canon will soon give me some more fast zoom choices in the 17-55 or 20-50 range.
From a content perspective, I shoot a lot of wow photos with the 10-22mm lens for shots you just can't do with any other lens. It's wide and it's sharp.
From a quality perspective, the IS and sharpness of the 70-200 and the 24-105 help me make a higher percentage of wow photos. Most of my photos are hand held. They can help me make sharp vibrant photos.
From a "my that's a big lens" perspective, the 70-200 IS gets the win.
Maybe Canon will soon give me some more fast zoom choices in the 17-55 or 20-50 range.
Feb 16, 2006 at 04:54 PM
p.5 #15"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
To be honest, i would give the wow factor to a 17-40 f/4 that I used to have. I was not expecting much out of the lens, thinking i would need to stop down to f/8 all the time (which i didnt have a problem with anyway). Fired some shots off at my first shoot with it, WOW, it was sharp! I would never expect it from the lens, i've heard alot of people complaining about the sharpness. It was great.
Feb 16, 2006 at 05:10 PM
p.5 #16"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
my first really WOW! hit me 2 days ago when I tested for the 1st time my brand new 70-200 L 4.0.
Never seen this though I owned previously (among other lenses) a 200 2.8L II, a 28-80L and the super great 10-22.
Never seen this though I owned previously (among other lenses) a 200 2.8L II, a 28-80L and the super great 10-22.
Feb 16, 2006 at 05:25 PM
p.5 #17"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
Oh yeah, kind of off topic. When I got mine Canon 70-200mm f2.8L IS, it was yellowish or whatever that color call. Anyway, when I took a picture of it with a flash, dang that thing is white. And yes, it WOWed me a different way. I love that lens.
Tony
I love that lens. Tony
Feb 16, 2006 at 05:38 PM
p.5 #18"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
I'd go for a cheepy .. a 50 1.8 best $I have ever spent.
Feb 16, 2006 at 06:10 PM
p.5 #19"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
Though this lens gets bashed all the time, I absolutely love my 24-70L. Tack sharp and worth every penny.
The 50 1.8 I had is definately a wowza for the money. Still one of my favorite lenses.
The pop you get out of the 70-200 L is just amazing...my favorite lens.
The 50 1.8 I had is definately a wowza for the money. Still one of my favorite lenses.
The pop you get out of the 70-200 L is just amazing...my favorite lens.
Feb 16, 2006 at 06:32 PM
p.5 #20"WOW" Reaction Lenses of Yours
For me, I seem to get the most WOW at certain lens aperature combinations. This isn't to say that these lenses aren't good at other aperatures, they just seem to produce more WOW shots at these.
17-40 f4 - From f8 to f11
24-70 - At f5.6
35mm f1.4 - From f2 to f5.6
85mm f1.2L - From f1.2 to f2
50mm f1.4 - At f8
85mm f1.8 - From f4 to f5.6
135mm f2 - From f2 to f4
400mm f5.6 - At f8
17-40 f4 - From f8 to f11
24-70 - At f5.6
35mm f1.4 - From f2 to f5.6
85mm f1.2L - From f1.2 to f2
50mm f1.4 - At f8
85mm f1.8 - From f4 to f5.6
135mm f2 - From f2 to f4
400mm f5.6 - At f8
Feb 16, 2006 at 06:58 PM