Once again I have decided to sell the 85 L to buy a 70-200, 5th time now I think
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.
Some photographers get the EF 14-24 f/2.8 for testing a few weeks ago.
The TS 17 was so soft I had to sell it, the af didn't work on three copies !! Useless...
Er... Sorry..TS E 17 is a manual lens ...trying to auto focus it is like trying to milk a bull?
Wow.. does it hurt to be so wrong?
And besides, not all moving people are like the elderly and very cold, you apparently shoot.
a better question would be.. does it hurt you.. to be so ignorant? the 50L is CRAP.. the 24L and 35L are kinda ok (you heard me! if they were in the sigma 35/1.4 price range.. they would almost kick ass.. but for double that? forget it!).. the 85L is the only sub 100mm L that kicks some serious ass..
an f/1.4 wide-angle lens is NOT about speed. It is about the chance to get at least some halfway decent bokeh at wide-angle focal lengths. An f/1.4 lens therefore can never be substituted by a slower lens with IS.
The real issue however is not IS or not IS, it is the fact, that all of Canon's current 1.4 lenses deliver SUB-PAR IQ wide open. NB matter whether they have a red ring or not. 24 L II, 35 L I, 50 non L. And the 50/1.2 L is a sub-par piece of cr*p as well by todays standards. A Sigma 50/1.4 runs circles around it.
As far as 35mm fixed focals are concerned, currently the only 35/1.4 in the entire market which is fully usable at f/1.4 is the Sigma 35/1.4. At a street price wich is lower than the totally useless Canon 24 /2.8 IS and 28/2.8 IS and it beats the Zeiss Distagon 35.
And btw, I come from an entirely different usage situation:
* when I shoot handheld in low light, I ALWAYS shoot moving targets ... that is ... PEOPLE in motion ... 1/60s needed, nothing less. IS useless. :-)
* when I shoot static targets in low light, I ALWAYS use a tripod. IS useless. :-)
Need to wait and see if the 35mm beats the sigma.
As for the 14-24, too late I already sprung for the Tokina 16-28.
I used my 5D2 the other day after not using it for a while, and honestly it seems like the images may be a bit sharper on the Mark II. Not necessarily better, but sharper.
Sorry for somewhat hi-jacking the thread, I tried the "Camera Standard" setting and I relly liked it. Is there a way to enable it by default?