Got my "new" 1D Mark II up an running, after a trip to Canon Irvine to fix the CF card slot and clean the sensor (awesome sensor cleaning!). To test it out, I pulled the "new" 35-350L. Still getting used to the lens, and impressed with the sharp images and versatility.
I decided to leave the quality setting at L jpegs as it came back from Canon, instead of my usual RAW. So these images have had slightly less PP adjustment than my usual (which isn't a lot). Maybe KR has a point? Fun to try, anyway.
My eyes say they look sharp, nice colors & the right brightness, but where's the snow? Up here in the Great White North Christmas is supposed to be WHITE. I hate that idea.
This lens is doing exactly what I had hoped it would! Beautiful skin tones (along with all the great outdoor color). I had an opportunity last night for some casual photos with friends over to the house -- wonderful nephew (23 months old), who we'd all like to get into entertainment.
Very pleased with the results! Hopefully the color and exposure will translate properly to the forum.
Basically, I sold my Zeiss ZE 35/2 lens to buy this lens. While the two lenses can't really be compared (the Zeiss took terrific pictures, too), the 35-350 is much more useful and versatile for me and my interests. If I can find a good used deal, I'll someday be seriously considering the 28-300 to give myself a little more wide end for events, especially if I want to use APS-H bodies like this situation.
Thanks Stan! The more negative comments I read while researching, the more curious I became!
I know a lens like the Tamron 28-300 is going to be weak, but I figured if Canon had the balls to put an "L" on it, they had a good reason for doing so, even if it wasn't the top IQ "L" they have ever made. I really can't think of a bad "L" design. Sure, some samples have had problems and some designs more sample variation than others. But overall, if it says "L" it means quality.
Some of my photos could have been improved with IS and 28mm would be an asset. Last week, for the first time, I took out two 1D2 bodies, one with the 35-350 and the other with the 16-35L II. Although the 16-35 had better detail at 35mm, the 35-350 was emminently useable. A great combo, taking these two for a walk around Huntington Gardens without a camera bag -- pretty much everything possible is covered. Color balance between the two was very good.
A few outdoor wedding location scouting shots from this weekend.
Although these particular shots could have been taken with an old 35-80 zoom, I did use the range from 35-350 on the shoot. I still have one of the early 28-80 3.5-5.6 USM lenses that could have done these shots nearly as well. The vignetting might have even worked to good effect.
I still have one of the early 28-80 3.5-5.6 USM lenses that could have done these shots nearly as well. The vignetting might have even worked to good effect.