November 28, 2014, 07:36:31 PM

Author Topic: Sleeper Lenses?  (Read 14695 times)

Jay Khaos

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 200
    • View Profile
Sleeper Lenses?
« on: July 18, 2013, 04:47:29 PM »
Does anyone have a lens (or a few) that they love, but rarely comes up in conversation, isn't reviewed well online, is overshadowed by an alternative, etc?

Mine is the 50 1.8.  Even though it's not totally overshadowed, but I think it tends to get pushed aside in favor of the 50 1.4 more than it deserves
5DIII | 85mm f1.2L • 70-200mm f2.8L IS II • 50mm f1.8 II

canon rumors FORUM

Sleeper Lenses?
« on: July 18, 2013, 04:47:29 PM »

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #1 on: July 18, 2013, 05:26:13 PM »
+1 for the nifty fifty, but I don't think it's maligned or sneered at so much, a lot of folk just don't get on with the build or genuinely require faster quieter af.  I love mine, it's the third plastic I've owned (one stolen off me by my dad, one dropped) and I had a metal mk1 before that.

In the same vein, I loved my 28mm f2.8.  Lots to hate.  Geometric bokeh, arc-form drive, but it was compact, fringe free, cheap and sharp wide open.  It's a lens that I knew would deliver for me and wouldn;t need much post-procrssing.  Worked out as a slowish standard lens on my cameras, but a great wee walkabout lens. 

I replaced it with a zoom as I was consolidating with an eye to video, but it's the only lens I've sold that I actually wish I hadn't. And I say that having owned tilt shifts, bigmas, fast L telephotos etc.

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3526
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #2 on: July 18, 2013, 05:40:09 PM »
I always hear about

16-35's
24-70's
70-200's

and yet I don't own one of those lenses. When I say 135mm F/2 to a newer photog, they look at me, pause for a moment and say  "They still make 135's?" or the proverbial "What's that?" *Facepalm.

Jay Khaos

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 200
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #3 on: July 18, 2013, 05:52:55 PM »
+1 for the nifty fifty, but I don't think it's maligned or sneered at so much, a lot of folk just don't get on with the build or genuinely require faster quieter af.  I love mine, it's the third plastic I've owned (one stolen off me by my dad, one dropped) and I had a metal mk1 before that.

True.  I've heard a lot of good too, but I've also heard it get talked about as if it's garbage... as if one of its drawbacks is a complete dealbreaker, like the skinny focus ring or plastic construction.

I always hear about

16-35's
24-70's
70-200's

and yet I don't own one of those lenses. When I say 135mm F/2 to a newer photog, they look at me, pause for a moment and say  "They still make 135's?" or the proverbial "What's that?" *Facepalm.

lol.. I agree on the 135 being a sleeper.  It was the first L I owned, but honestly probably wouldnt have even knew about it without the internet at my disposal.
5DIII | 85mm f1.2L • 70-200mm f2.8L IS II • 50mm f1.8 II

RobertG.

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #4 on: July 18, 2013, 06:08:40 PM »
For me it's the TS-E 90mm. It is hardly ever mentioned, although the image quality is excellent.
5DII | TS-E 17 mm L | TS-E 24 mm II | EF 35mm f1.4 | TS-E 45mm | EF 50mm f1.4 |
Tamron SP 24-70 f2.8 | EF 85mm f1.8 | TS-E 90mm f2.8 | EF 70-300mm F4.0-5.6 L

Haydn1971

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 427
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #5 on: July 18, 2013, 06:16:51 PM »
iPhone and lensbaby for me

iPhone is always there and paired with Instagram it's an amazing tool...  Lensbaby is my want to play lens, I've got 4x & 10x macros, I've the wide and tele adapters, the fisheye, the shaped aperture rings - hours of fun every time it comes out of my kit bag - got £300 to blow ?  Go spend it on a load of lensbaby kit !
Regards, Haydn

:: View my photostream on Flickr, Canon EOS 6D, EOS M ,  16-35mm II, 24-70mm II, 70-300mm L, 135mm f2.0 L, 22mm f2.0, Lensbaby, EOS M adaptor, Cosina CT1G film SLR & 50mm f2.0 lens

mb66energy

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #6 on: July 18, 2013, 06:23:24 PM »
Using with APS-C, primarily 40D:

  * 2.8/24mm (non-USM): Very sharp, contrasty lens + great FOV, similar to 40mm on FF. Compact, sturdy, unobtrusive
  * 2.0/100mm (USM): Very sharp, contrasty, unobtrusive lens, very compact compared to 100mm macros. I like the 160mm effective focal length for landscape, nature, street etc.

A nice couple too with to APS-C bodies ... and will be nice too with two (dreaming!!!) FF bodies ...
TOOLS: EF-S 10-22 | 60 || EF 2.8/24 | 2.8/40* | 2.8 100 Macro* |2.0/100 | 4.0/70-200* | 5.6/400* || 2 x 40D | 600D | EOS M  [* most used lenses]

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #6 on: July 18, 2013, 06:23:24 PM »

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #7 on: July 18, 2013, 06:45:26 PM »
Quote
lol.. I agree on the 135 being a sleeper.  It was the first L I owned, but honestly probably wouldnt have even knew about it without the internet at my disposal.

I had it's sister lens the 200mm f2.8L which on APS-C was a superlative sports lens.

I also had the 135 f2.8 SF.  Nice images with SF dialled out. Awful.    slow.         focusing.


axtstern

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 137
  • EOS M(ediochre)
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #8 on: July 18, 2013, 06:57:10 PM »
The Dinosaur among the sleepers:

The Tamron 28-105 1:2.8

Fat     (82mm) front lens and the body never slimmer than that
Long   fully extended (it extends twofold) it is about 20% longer than the EF 200 L
Noisy  The AF engine was engineered in a past century
Color  Tamron's baroque grey/antrazit plastic finish

Nothing for the weak, after 15 years of heavy use the surviving models of this lens need a lot of strength to move the zoom ring. Feels like wringing water out of an old wet leather hide. 

No IS, No USM

but.. 50% more reach than the EF 24-70 and still 1:2.8
When I shoot as a guest some pictures at a wedding the pros usualy run forward and backward with their 24-70L while I stand like a rock. When I have a Chance of doing some gear talk with this guys laughter often changes to desire once they tried this lens on a 1D

regards

Swphoto

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2013, 07:25:28 PM »
I really liked my Canon 28mm 1.8 when I was using it on a crop - it rarely left the camera. Build quality was really good (or seemed it) for a non-L lens - nice focus ring, and internal focusing - so no issues with it being fragile like the 50 1.4.

I didn't care for it on full frame, though.

You can pick them up used or refurbished for a good price, given that they're not very popular.

friedrice1212

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #10 on: July 18, 2013, 07:49:13 PM »
Kind of a sleeper on the Internet because of its age, but certainly not a sleeper in the real world, the 70-200 2.8 IS Mark I. I picked one up for 1200$ the other day and I was simply amazed by it. Sure, it's not as sharp as the Mk II at 200/2.8 and the AF isn't as blistering fast, but it doesn't cost 2800$ with taxes here in Quebec, Canada. I shoot low light dance events with it at ISO 6400, so lens sharpness is the least of my worries. Unless you earn your living with the 70-200, the Mark I is still one hell of a lens. Bang for buck guaranteed!

(Of course if you're gonna use it outdoors at ISO 100 and you're tight on budget, go get an f/4 and skip this old lens)

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #11 on: July 18, 2013, 08:38:47 PM »
+1

The trusty old f2.8 non-Is is in my kit bag. 

LewisShermer

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 196
  • point shoot hope
    • View Profile
    • Business!
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #12 on: July 18, 2013, 08:53:26 PM »
I really liked my Canon 28mm 1.8 when I was using it on a crop - it rarely left the camera. Build quality was really good (or seemed it) for a non-L lens - nice focus ring, and internal focusing - so no issues with it being fragile like the 50 1.4.

I didn't care for it on full frame, though.

You can pick them up used or refurbished for a good price, given that they're not very popular.

Was going to say exactly the same. the 28mm 1.8 was never off my 7D/60D/500D but I never have it on my 5Diii. such a shame. it's a beautiful little lens on a crop sensor, just not that great on a full frame.
5Diii, 1Dsiii, 60D, 500D, EX580, loads of crappy flash guns... 28mm 1.8, Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art, 50mm 1.4, 100mm macro 2.8, 24-105mm 4L, 70-200mm 2.8L, lensbaby composer...

www.lewismaxwell.co.uk

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #12 on: July 18, 2013, 08:53:26 PM »

steven kessel

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 207
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #13 on: July 18, 2013, 09:52:30 PM »
Sure! My candidate is the 400DO.  Wonderfully light when compared with the 400 F2.8, a lens that I can hike with.  And, just great for bird and wildlife photography.  It's as sharp as any telephoto I own.  Apparently, this lens got bad reviews back when it was introduced and has languished in the shadows for years. It has a bad rap, take my word for it.  Mine is my favorite lens.

Mt Spokane Photography

  • EF 50mm F 0.7 IS
  • *********
  • Posts: 9191
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #14 on: July 18, 2013, 10:09:06 PM »
There are some older lenses that are not commonly found any longer that are low cost, yet do a good job for their price.
The old EF 70-210mm F/4 does a fair job, as does the old Tokina 400mm f/5.6 and the Tokina 17mm f/3.5.
 
 
 

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #14 on: July 18, 2013, 10:09:06 PM »