 |
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
|
|
Review Date: Sep 10, 2014
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
good colors and contrast, fast af, good focal range
|
|
Cons:
|
Bad corners, quality control flaws, noisy IS
|
|
|
It could be a good walk around lens, if you can get a good copy.
Me, I tried 2 copies with the same decentering problem. 20-25% of the frame showing very visible lower resolution than the rest, at different focals each.
Seems like this is a very common feature of the canon lenses, too bad.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS
|
|
Review Date: Jun 10, 2014
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Reasonably well built. Is. Good colors (better than the non-is). Quieter af and usable mf ring. Bokeh quality is a bit better for my taste, but therīs not a huge difference. (compared to old version)
|
|
Cons:
|
Not huge difference in image quality overall compared to old version. Field curvature phenomenon that was not present in the older 35.
Qc issues.
|
|
|
I passed through 4 copies from different retailers before finding one that worked fair enough, and even this one is not stellar at all.
First copy didnīt focus at infinity (from 20 m. onwards).
Second one frontfocused at almost every focusing distance.
Third one backfocused and had notable decentering.
The last oneīs resolution was not as high as the others.
To sum up I have to firmly manifest my disappointment about canon quality control. I have owned many canon and third party lenses, and I do own the older 35 model and have to say that only a try was needed to find a copy that worked properly. That was some years ago. Nowadays it seems to be difficult to find a good one.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
|
|
Review Date: Dec 5, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
af accuracy, fast, near silent, not the best IS, but better than nothing.
good sharpness and colors, good range if you already have a wide-angle.
And, of course, good price.
|
|
Cons:
|
some A.Cīs visible at the long end. (But easy to correct in ps)
noisy IS
|
|
|
Had the opportunity to test some lenses I was interested in, and boy, what a surprise! I tested a 50 mm f/1.4 and a 28 mm f/1.8. These were the last copies in the store, so I assume that maybe they were not excellent copies at all. I took my 40d and made my tests, then pixel-peeped the results on the lab top and...
amazingly, this lens outperformed the other two in terms of sharpness and af accuracy (ŋ?ŋ?ŋ). I took more than 40 or 50 pics with different f/ numbers, and boy I can swear I couldnīt believe it, after all the reviews I had read. I own other lenses: 17-40L, 18-55 IS, sigma 10-20, canon ef 35 mm f2 and have tested others like famous tamron 17-50, canon ef 70-300 IS and so on...and can say I recommend this lens as far as the focal range is useful to you. In terms of build quality, of course itīs not an L, but itīs far better than the 18-55 IS and even the 70-300. Zoom ring is not bad (creep?- are you running all the time?) nor mf ring. Af accuracy is good, USM near silent. IS is a little noisy. Sahrpness is very good all over the range except at the long end (135), where you can find a lateral CAīs.
If you can live without the build quality of an L, donīt look farther. This is a good lens.
Last advice: for this and all the lenses you are interested in, try to test it in the store, donīt buy blindly.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
|
|
Review Date: Jul 19, 2008
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
|
The cons and the pros:
1. Totally plastic. (Mount too)
2. MF ringīs horrible. Not really usable.
3. Optic elements wobble, and there is a "jump" in my copy while zooming about 40mm onward and backwards.
4. Af accuracy is not very good; Good if the object is close, not that good at long distances (Iīve compared different pics at the same focal but diferent distances).
5. af speed: reasonably fast. Little noisy but not annoying.
6.IS. Works fine.
7. Not really a fast lens (5,6 at 55mm)
Image Quality:
Sharp from 18 to 40 more or less. Not that sharp till the end of the zoom. (If the af works fine, of course).
Good colors and contrast.
Quite visible distortion at 18.
Some C.Aīs at all focals.
Flare: Very good (surprisingly!)
The price: the very best.
If the money is a problem, itīs a good value, but if you got a little more save and go for a superior lens.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 35mm f/2
|
|
Review Date: Jul 13, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
(on a 40d) af accuracy, af speed, sharpness throughout the frame,
weightless, fast.
|
|
Cons:
|
manual focus ring, occasional under&overexposure errors, noisy af.
|
|
|
(Tested on a 40d)
Itīs the best lens in that range for an aps-c that Iīve tested, of course for that price. The sharpness is absolutely amazing, at least in my copy. Pixel-peeping a crop, it seems like youīre watching a pic from a tele-zoom lens.
at f/2 there is some lack of contrast or sharpness, but it is normal and perfectly usable.
Itīs a personal perception, but i think that the 40dīs af system really works fine only on this kind of fast lenses (f/2.8 or faster). Fix-focal lenses (look for you right focal) are the very best, and this one is included though itīs not an L.
vignetting: Not an issue.
Acīs: well controlled.
Sharpness: amazing (on an aps-c)
Af accuracy: Great.
Construction is not that good, but far better that the kitīs.
Af noise: Yes, it sounds like a wasp. (Not problem for me)
Final advice: If youīre looking for a fix-focal like this one and donīt want to go for an "L", go for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
