This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Anyone have any experience with this lens? I'm going to purchase a new wide angle and I haven't heard too much about this one. I'm very familiar with this focal length as I frequently use the 24mm end on my 24-105L with my 5D2.
I want a good landscape prime that has other creative potential. Probably gonna get this or the 21mm f/2.8.
If it were me, I'd stick with 5D3. 1DX and 5D3 got the same AF (almost). As for low light performance, 1DX is just a little bit better. I suggest getting 1DX only if more than 6fps performance is crucial to you. Your macbook is also important since it is so good to edit raw files using mac. If I were you, I'd like a good TS-E lens instead of the 35 though.I agree with this advice....EXCEPT the bit about 35mm. if you shoot a lot of product and architecture then, yeah get a TS-E...if not... save a bundle an get a better lens in the Sigma 35mm f/1.4. ...there is $1000 for a nice trip to use it on!
I have a Canon EF 70-200 f/4 L and a 5DmkII. I've used this setup regularly for awhile now, and I've come across something I can't quite explain. I recently shot this bridge in Oregon. I used a sturdy tripod (Manfrotto ballhead/tripod combo), so stability isn't an issue. Still, several of these images came out much less sharp than I've been used to seeing from this lens. It looks like motion blur to me, but like I said, I was using a sturdy tripod. I shot at f/8, and even one of the images at f/11 had this same issue. Shutter speed was 1/20 and ISO was 125, and autofocus was directly on the front of the bridge itself. I can't imagine this lens is suddenly misfocusing so badly.
I'm at a loss. I ~thought~ I had all three legs on steady ground, but of course anything is possible, and it's possible one of them may have been in some soft ground, slowly sinking during that shutter time. I just don't think that's the case, though. I don't have any other explanations than this. Like I said, I'm used to getting much sharper photos with this lens. I thought I would throw this question out to the many qualified photogs on here. I'm not a beginner, I'm just not sure what happened. Thanks in advance for your helpful comments and suggestions. I'm posting an unedited, straight-from-lightroom- image. You can pixel peep at the full version size here. (2.4MB file)
The MkII is a wonderful lens, I doubt you'll regret it. If anything, you'll be selling the f/4 version. Personally, I can see the utility of having the 70-200 II, and the 70-300L for travel. The latter made the 70-200/4 IS less interesting, to me.
Originally had the 70-200 F2.8 and then added F4 for travel (both IS). Then I heard about the 70-300 and reluctantly took the plunge. THinking of selling the F4 IS but it is a great lens. Hard to decide which to let go.
I know I need to get on the 12 step problem, at least I know I have a problem - it is called GAS.
Every time I talk to my wife about purchasing new equipment.
I think the Canon 85mm 1.2 L II is a magical lense. It just gives you the colours and the bokeh with sharpness, even wide open (in the centre). I luckily shot one for about half the price listed, otherwise I probably would never bought one for 2k€. Now, after experiencing the lense I WOULD pay 2k€ for it. Why? After decades of having a lot of lenses from wide angle to longer zooms I just made a summaryline and asked me... what lense do you use very often and which one is hunting dust?
I got me catched on 85 1.2, 100 2.8 L IS and the Magic Drainpipe. Of course I like my other lenses, but you just can shoot with the Canonball and everything works out to be beautiful. The only thing I would criticise is the lack of wheathersealing and the sometimes annoying 0,95m minimumdistance.
This lense could be the REASON why someone should buy a Canonbody. And as I still use the 5DC, I enjoy the FULL step over the (otherwise fantastic) 85mm 1.8.
P.S. How can I change the camera in my profile? Damn
The 85L has more OOF Blur at the same apertures compared to other lenses.... this is key for you.
Take a look at this: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-85mm-f-1.4-EX-DG-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx
The 4th pic down of his daughter holding a iron fence... hover over the different F values and you will see that F2, the EF85L has almost as much blur as the Sigma does at F1.4. And we know Sigma is better than the EF 85 F/1.8... You will have 2-3 virtual apertures left with the 85L (or should I say levels) to blur out the background more.
It is a very sharp lens even wide open. You will lose some AF speed but then are you also addicted to AF speed?
I would own one if I made money off this hobby...