 |
Tamron 17-35MM F/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical (IF)
|
|
Review Date: Nov 9, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
price worthy,compact,manufacture quality
|
|
Cons:
|
not as sharp as "L",color is not vivid as "L" .at the price maybe the compare is unfair.
|
|
|
After 2 years with my EF24-70,i suddenly have a ridiculous idea ,I thought i should sell it,and replaced it with a smaller and wider pro lens,becauce i complained the color and sharpness of the images which EF24-70 made was not as good as the EF70-200 one,what a big mistake idea!
after some compare and review reading ,i though this 17-35 is good choice ,but after some try ,i find some softness even at f5.6. By the way, I had used CANON EF17-40 for months,in the same boat with tomron 17-35 on the DLSR ,but on the film camra ,tack sharp,from this point and consider such low price,tomron 17-35 is quite good,but it didn't reach my standard. so i returned this l lens as quickly as possible.
fortunately, my EF24-70 had not sold out.because the marked price was high.
apologize for my grammer and spelling mistake.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
|
|
Review Date: Nov 4, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
light weight,optic performence,great IS.
|
|
Cons:
|
may be price ,but i think it worth the cost.
|
|
|
= i had sold my 70-200 f2.8 IS，and waited this lens for a long time (what a big risk), of course the 70-200 f2.8 IS is good,but it too heavy for hike,and too big for take picture in the streets(eye ball absorber).
=After some test l got the conclusion,that the optic performence of this one as good as (if not better )the non IS one.and f4 aperture is quite practicable.
=the IS is as good as 70-200 f2.8 IS,i can hold it at 1/15th seconds,and have 70% percentage opportunity get rather sharp picture.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
|
|
Review Date: Jun 4, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
image quality is best among all the EF zoom lens, include sigma .IS is great, nearly a revolution technique,
|
|
Cons:
|
white aspect .
|
|
above all, forgive me my english level.
I had used all three EF70-200 L lens,upgraded from f/4 version to f/2.8 non-IS version and then IS version, So i can review all of them. Their image quality is similar, but the f4 version is little inferior. The pros of the lens is compact, cost and very good result. The cons of the lens is f/4 aperture is not enough for a 70-200mm lens, greatly restrict the usage in dim light condition.
The f/2.8 non-IS version nearly flawless, but IS is real profit, it greatly expand usage scope(I can hold with 1/20 second and got very good sharpness ). Some reviews told that the image quality is little inferior compare to the non-IS version .But hardly to find in practice.
The real problem was that some very little stain spot was found in my copy under flash light. I can't sure what it is, And It wasn't my problem alone , see this:
http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=323831&pagenumber=1
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
|
|
Review Date: May 12, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp color contrast ,dust seal,
|
|
Cons:
|
body and hood is biger ,cost
|
|
|
I wonder why old ef28-70/2.8 got 9.6 high remarks on this REVIEW, and meanwill the new 24-70 noly get 9? I had used two of 28-70 , and finaly upgrated to the new 24-70 .
The color and contrast of both are similar ,the old one is also good, but seem little soft at the 70mm end(wide open), The 24-70/2.8 is more sharper ,especially at the 70 end.
But the old 28-70 is dust sucker , BUT you can never worry this situation on the 24-70. Consider the bulit quality i give the EF24-70/2.8 10 score, the old EF28-70/2.8 9 score.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
