Canon Lenses

[jimmyd]

if you're looking for the perfect portrait lens, i'd go with the 135 f/2 L prime rather than the 85 f/1.2... you'd also save a few bucks that way.

[PhotoDave1]

Igor:

It looks like I must be reading your post a little late because it seems as if you have already spent your money but in my opinion for a good "walking around" lense it is hard to beat the Canon 28 - 105 USM F3.5 - 4.5. Even thought this lense is not an "L" lense it has been a benchmark for Canon users for as long as I can remember.

For me, I have been looking at some high dollar glass and I read the reviews on the 24 - 70 F2.8 Canon "L" as well as the Canon 28 - 70 F2.8 "L" lenses and both of these lenses only scored marginally better in tests than the Canon 28 - 105 USM F3.5 - 4.5 and this lense is not an "L" lense.

The above Canon "L" lenses are easily in the $1,000 + range while the Canon 28 - 105 F3.5 - 4.5 non "L" can be had used in excellent condition for approx $250.00 so do the math and tell me where you are better spending your money for a "walking around" lense.

Good luck with your new lenses and happy shooting.

[R_Fredrick_Smith]

Originally Posted by PhotoDave1

Igor:

It looks like I must be reading your post a little late because it seems as if you have already spent your money but in my opinion for a good "walking around" lense it is hard to beat the Canon 28 - 105 USM F3.5 - 4.5. Even thought this lense is not an "L" lense it has been a benchmark for Canon users for as long as I can remember.

For me, I have been looking at some high dollar glass and I read the reviews on the 24 - 70 F2.8 Canon "L" as well as the Canon 28 - 70 F2.8 "L" lenses and both of these lenses only scored marginally better in tests than the Canon 28 - 105 USM F3.5 - 4.5 and this lense is not an "L" lense.

The above Canon "L" lenses are easily in the $1,000 + range while the Canon 28 - 105 F3.5 - 4.5 non "L" can be had used in excellent condition for approx $250.00 so do the math and tell me where you are better spending your money for a "walking around" lense.

Good luck with your new lenses and happy shooting.

The reality of lens reviews is that you can find a good number of people who have good reviews of most any lens you look at. I believe the lens you mention represents a fair to good entry level lens, but in the long run will prove not as durable or desirable over time. I moderate a very large Canon user group and we have had literally hundreds who have had the Canon 28-105 USM f3.5-4.5 lens. Virtually all of them eventually found it limiting them in their photography for one reason or the other. Many of them ultimately upgraded to the 24-105 F4 IS lens. The fixed f4 means superior performance over the variable f3.5-4.5. It means you are always viewing at f4 and not most of the time at f4.5, so you get a brighter viewfinder for one thing. Naturally you get an even brighter viewfinder with a fixed 2.8. But other thing this is of tremendous advantage is the IS factor. This gives 2 to 3 fstops of additional latitude when hand holding. So a shot made at 100mm can be hand held at 1/15th to 1/25th and get the same sharp results as at 1/100th on a Canon 5d which is what the original poster had bought. By the way he settled on the 24-105 because he could get it as a kit lens (and it is a L lens). The other thing about the L lens is that they are built tougher and are better weather sealed and so have less issues down the road.
Cheers,
rfs

[stevenD]

I use my 24-70mm nearly all of the time and would highly recommend it.

My other Canon Lenses include:
14mm 2.8
16-35mm 3.8
85mm 1.2
70-200 2.8 IS
500mm 4.0 IS
and a 1.4x

[patobfoto]

I know I'm gonna catch flack on this one but I have used my Canon 28-300mm L IS lens for quite awhile now. I have found it beneficial to have the greatest zoom range in the studio where I can come in nice and tight if I want to when things are moving fast and the model is really working with me. This is not the least expensive lens in the bunch by any means but as already said, the IS helps no matter what the environment. I have a 70-210 Tameron 2.8 and the Canon 85mm 1.2 which I will use on occasion but my preference is still the 28-300. Ok, I said it so let me have it if you want to. I am still a happy camper so far.

JMHO



Pat

Re: Canon Lenses 

[ffppro]

I received my new equipment this weekend, and although I only got to play with it a bit, this is what I think so far:

85 f/1.2 - The most amazing lens I have ever seen, and a must have for portraits.

24-105 f/4 - Great knock around, carry anywhere lens. I can see getting lots of use out of this lens, since I carry my camera with me practically everywhere I go, and I need a very versatile lens.

70-200 f/2.8 - Beautiful lens. Takes gorgeous pictures in the studio, but it is just a bit long for my setup since I don't have much room, and for full body shots, I need something a little shorter.

Since the 70-200 f/2.8 is a bit long for my studio, it looks like I am going to be buying the 24-70 f/2.8 in the near future to complete the full range at f/2.8.

Here are some test shots;
This was shot with the 85 f/1.2:

Re: Canon Lenses 

This was shot with the 70-200 f/2.8

Re: Canon Lenses 

Thank you all for helping me out with picking the right glass.