I would have though almost everybody would have the same answer as me: the 24-105mm L! I wasn't blown away with it; having used a good 17-55mm on crop for a while before that lens. But my second L: the 70-200mm L ii really showed me the light.
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.
First of all, you can buy a new one for just over $6,000. This is due to the exchange rate of US dollars in Canada. The lens will have a full North America Canon Warranty, and can be serviced at any US or Canadian service facility.Thanks for the replies. I've been signed up for the CPW notifications for a while. They never have the 300mm 2.8 in stock during the sale events. And lately they don't have it in stock at all. Getting it from Canon refurbed during a sale would be my #1 choice.
If you are within driving distance of Canada, you can pick it up. There is no customs duty. Its definitely better than a used one for the same price!! See the note on the CPW page with a link to it.
You did not say if the one you saw was used or refurbished. Canon gives their refurbished lenses a full 1 year warranty as well as a return for any reason within 2 weeks. Many stores do not accept returns of used equipment.
Canon charges $5839, but they are out of stock right now, after offering 15 or 20% off that price for Mothers Day. They will be back in stock before long.
Don't pay higher than the Canon price, there refurbs are usually in condition 10, and have that factory warranty.
Also check CPW or signup for a notification for price drops.
New 5D and 7D should be out today.All sarcasm aside, you will not regret it one bit. A fantastic all-purpose camera. And presumably you're getting it while the price is much lower than it has been since launch.
I just bought a 5Dmk3.
Why the 300 f/2.8 II and not the 200-400? I have the previous generation 300 f/2.8 IS and really don't like taking the lens off to put on or take off a TC. I also have a 7D and 5D3 but think it's an excellent pairing.At the risk of sounding glib by answering the question for Arkarch... I can think of 4,500 reasons why the 300mm f/2.8 ii and not the 200-400mm.
The only brass step-up rings that I know of are the ones from Heliopan -- more expensive then the B+W's, but way cheaper then gear with damaged threads... I've used nothing but the Heliopan's for awhile now, and I honestly can't recall ever having them stick.Thanks for the recommendation. Now... Off to buy some pricey brass rings! Better safe than sorry!
The B+W filters are made of brass, the step up rings are anodized aluminum.Ruh-roh, Raggy! I guess I've been lucky not to crank down on them whee using them. Thanks for the heads-up!
Keep a filter wrench handy
+1. That's the setup I've been using for a while (82mm expensive filters + step up rings as needed). In fact, I think it was you Neuro who recommended the brass B+W step up rings that I ended up buying and using!Might just have to get the 16-35/4L IS. Selling the 16-35/2.8L II would cover the cost. Less than 15% of my 16-35L shots are wider than f/4, and of those a reasonable fraction are of static subjects where 3-4 stops of IS would be of more benefit than 1 stop of light. Sharper would be welcome, too.
Bummer (for me) about the 77mm filter size, as the 24-70/2.8L II and TS-E 24L II both use 82mm, as does the 16-35/2.8L II. I have the needed filters in 77mm (B+W Käsemann CPL, 10-stop ND, and the Lee WA adapter), it just means carrying them, too.
No, just get a 77 to 82 step up ring and use the 82mm filters you are carrying on the 77mm lens.
Smacks the side of my head. Already have a 77→82mm ring, actually, and it'll likely go on after the hood just fine.
My tamron 28-75 took down my 24-105L for RAW sharpness and my tamron 17-50 2.8 took down my 17-40L all-around.Tamron hit a sweet spot with their new superzoom telephoto. I am surprised as anyone with the 150-600mm. After owning and using it for a couple of months, I decided to sell my 300 f4 L & 100-400 L. The quality and versatility of that zoom is enough to satisfy me until I'm ready to drop some dough on a big white lens. This from someone who's never owned a non-vintage 3rd party lens.
I think people were just trying to provide helpful answers to a direct question with a pretty obvious answer.You know I think I could come up with any bogus behaviour by a Canon product and one or more people would find a way to justify it.With Canon lenses mounted on a Canon camera, I've watched it focus on something and lock, then I press the focus button again, it de-focuses and refocuses again. Why can't it just "know" that it has acquired focus and not move the second time?That part of the focusing algorithm is necessary because your camera has no knowledge that it hasn't moved or whatever you are shooting hasn't moved. It may have GPS in some models, but I've yet to hear of one with gyroscopes, accelerometers, and radar.
But then if a 3rd party behaves strangely, well, it is all the fault of the 3rd party and should never happen!You are responding to my answer about why the camera behaves the way it does. I somehow missed the part where I mentioned anything about lens brands.
The point I was making above is that if you've already focused the lens on X and press the button again, it is doubtful that the lens will end up in exactly the same position as before (and by exact, I mean exact, not some "within half a millimeter.")If that was your intention you may want to try and think of a different way to phrase future statements, lest you be offended by people's responses. Because that is not at all what you wrote originally.
I ended up ordering the Canon 35 IS if anyone is curious. Looking forward to getting it in the mail and putting it to use!I think you made a good choice. And, hey, if it doesn't work out - you can just send it to me. I've always wanted a 35mm prime.
With Canon lenses mounted on a Canon camera, I've watched it focus on something and lock, then I press the focus button again, it de-focuses and refocuses again. Why can't it just "know" that it has acquired focus and not move the second time?That part of the focusing algorithm is necessary because your camera has no knowledge that it hasn't moved or whatever you are shooting hasn't moved. It may have GPS in some models, but I've yet to hear of one with gyroscopes, accelerometers, and radar.