I recently got the 24mm f/1.4 L Mk II for photographing the northern lights (although I'd been looking at it ever since release for landscapes) and am very pleased with the results its capable of. I also have the following primes.
300mm f/2.8 L IS (probably my most used and usually with a 1.4x extender)
135mm f/2 L (probably my favourite in terms of the "look" of the images)
100mm f/2.8 macro (non-L)
50mm f/1.4
The 300+1.4x does result in a little bit of CA, but it's easily corrected in Lightroom and it's still much less than the 17-40 and 24-105 and also less than the 100-400. The contrast is also higher than the 100-400, with better bokeh and faster and more accurate focusing on the 7D, but it's pretty much on the limit weight-wise for birds in flight, for when tripods aren't possible. It also gives me better low light potential and I think the combination is a little sharper than my 100-400, but that could be due to focusing accuracy.
The 500 f/4 is on my wishlist for those frequent occasions when 420mm isn't enough, but I can't justify the cost to myself. I have tried the 2x extender on the 300, but I don't like the results, although I haven't spent alot of time microadjuting the focus. I've also thought about the upcoming 200-400, which could be part of a cunning plan.
300mm f/2.8 L IS (probably my most used and usually with a 1.4x extender)
135mm f/2 L (probably my favourite in terms of the "look" of the images)
100mm f/2.8 macro (non-L)
50mm f/1.4
The 300+1.4x does result in a little bit of CA, but it's easily corrected in Lightroom and it's still much less than the 17-40 and 24-105 and also less than the 100-400. The contrast is also higher than the 100-400, with better bokeh and faster and more accurate focusing on the 7D, but it's pretty much on the limit weight-wise for birds in flight, for when tripods aren't possible. It also gives me better low light potential and I think the combination is a little sharper than my 100-400, but that could be due to focusing accuracy.
The 500 f/4 is on my wishlist for those frequent occasions when 420mm isn't enough, but I can't justify the cost to myself. I have tried the 2x extender on the 300, but I don't like the results, although I haven't spent alot of time microadjuting the focus. I've also thought about the upcoming 200-400, which could be part of a cunning plan.
Upvote
0
I own: none 
I wish I had:
And if T/S lenses qualify as primes:
I wish I had:
- EF 100mm F/2.8 L Macro IS USM
- EF 180mm F/3.5L Macro USM
And if T/S lenses qualify as primes:
- TS-E 17mm F/4.0L
- TS-E 24mm F/3.5L II
Upvote
0
stefsan said:I own: none
I wish I had:
- EF 100mm F/2.8 L Macro IS USM
- EF 180mm F/3.5L Macro USM
And if T/S lenses qualify as primes:
- TS-E 17mm F/4.0L
- TS-E 24mm F/3.5L II
They are (so they certainly qualify as) primes
I have the 24 and I wish the 17 ...
Upvote
0
Using it on a APS-C Body (40D):
EF 24 mm 2.8
Great lens with low distortion, great contrast, very good sharpness wide open across the frame. Very lightweight and compact. Just missing USM/manual focus override but AF is very good with that lens.
EF 100 mm 2.0
Near perfect image quality in all terms, very compact, very fast AF, at f2.0 and with heavy contrasty scenes some colored rims around objects out of the focal plane are visible due to some longitudinal chromatic aberrations
Both lenses make a good combination - especially when used with two bodies: great IQ + unobtrusiveness + compactness + available light capabilities
And last but not least the "one-for-all-lens" - if I had to decide for just one lens I would pick the
EF-S 60 mm 2.8
Great IQ, very fast AF, compact, the "golden focal length" (for me!). The only (minor) drawback: at f2.8 and infinity this lens has some visible vignetting (not in the macro range).
What I really like: The missing "clonk" trying to photograph smaller objects/scenery due to the lifesize macro capabilities of that lens. 1:1 means an image field of 15 x 22 mm with APS-C sensors!
EF 24 mm 2.8
Great lens with low distortion, great contrast, very good sharpness wide open across the frame. Very lightweight and compact. Just missing USM/manual focus override but AF is very good with that lens.
EF 100 mm 2.0
Near perfect image quality in all terms, very compact, very fast AF, at f2.0 and with heavy contrasty scenes some colored rims around objects out of the focal plane are visible due to some longitudinal chromatic aberrations
Both lenses make a good combination - especially when used with two bodies: great IQ + unobtrusiveness + compactness + available light capabilities
And last but not least the "one-for-all-lens" - if I had to decide for just one lens I would pick the
EF-S 60 mm 2.8
Great IQ, very fast AF, compact, the "golden focal length" (for me!). The only (minor) drawback: at f2.8 and infinity this lens has some visible vignetting (not in the macro range).
What I really like: The missing "clonk" trying to photograph smaller objects/scenery due to the lifesize macro capabilities of that lens. 1:1 means an image field of 15 x 22 mm with APS-C sensors!
Upvote
0
Have:
300 2.8 I - for wildlife and field sports
85 1.2 II - for portraits
50 1.2 - for anything, walk-around, landscapes and I currently use with extension tube EF 25 for a cheap macro
Want:
100 2.8 L Macro
14 2.8 II - I thought about the 24 1.4 II but I think I am going to wait and see if a new 24-70 2.8 comes out in the next month or two.
I shoot primarily on a 5Dmk2 but I also have a 7D for sports and action
I love all of my primes in fact, if I get the 14 2.8 II, I will probably sell my 16-35. I have never really been happy with it and upon looking at my EXIF data, >75% of my shots are at 16 anyway . . .
300 2.8 I - for wildlife and field sports
85 1.2 II - for portraits
50 1.2 - for anything, walk-around, landscapes and I currently use with extension tube EF 25 for a cheap macro
Want:
100 2.8 L Macro
14 2.8 II - I thought about the 24 1.4 II but I think I am going to wait and see if a new 24-70 2.8 comes out in the next month or two.
I shoot primarily on a 5Dmk2 but I also have a 7D for sports and action
I love all of my primes in fact, if I get the 14 2.8 II, I will probably sell my 16-35. I have never really been happy with it and upon looking at my EXIF data, >75% of my shots are at 16 anyway . . .
Upvote
0
acoll123 said:
May I suggest a TS-E 17mm f/4L instead of the 14 2.8 II ? You still stay near 16mm and you gain tilt and shift abilities with excellent quality even at the edges when the lens is not shifted. You may sacrifice 3mm but I believe that the benefits outweigh this loss. Of course your mileage may vary...
Upvote
0
tron said:
Thanks - I thought about that. It seems to be an excellent lens but I take a lot of general shots in addition to landscapes and think I would really miss the autofocus and the extra stop . . . I would rather add that or the 24 TS-E someday - as long as this is still a wish list!
Upvote
0
Recently (as in, the last few weeks) I have been reducing my Canon DSLR lens 'collection' of 8, and have whittled it down to 5. That is, I sold 3 lenses (using gumtree in Australia - highly recommend it as a useful medium to advertise and sell in one's own geographical area.)
Among those I sold was the Canon 50mm f1.8 (for your info, the other two were the Canon 28-135mm USM IS, and the Canon 100-300 USM).
The 50mm f1.8 had superb qualities in some settings, (and yes, I had a 'decent' copy - in fact I initially had a copy that back focussed, and returned for this one which was better). On my Canon 350D body, its focus performance was weak. It was better on my Canon 7D, however still not to my liking.
I have decided that I probably won't get any lens that doesn't have USM / HSM (equivalent) focussing. The 'jittery-ness' and the noise and lack of focus flexibility (eg slower speed, apparent lack of fine accuracy, full-time manual focus) bugged me with the 50mm f1.8 in particular, as I mainly wanted it for critical applications (between f1.8 and f2.8).
Friends, I do realise "there is a very fine depth of field at f1.8" - I am aware of that, and I have used other lenses with a similarly shallow depth of field. The 50mm f1.8 just didn't meet my needs consistently. Focus accuracy and usability were the main issues I had with mine - even after I applied a systematic use - and noticeable improvement with my 7Ds manual focus adjustment (MFA).
So at the moment, the only prime that I have is the Canon 100mm macro USM (nonL)- which is a lens I really enjoy using. Obviously it serves superbly as a macro (where I usually use it hand-held with live-view). But in addition I ended up preferring it over the 50mm f1.8 for casual portraits and subject isolation (eg objects / still life). I expect to keep this lens. My copy focusses fast, consistently, even with very small dof settings. I get a very high keeper rate, whereas the 50mm f1.8 keeper rate was so-so, which annoyed me. When the 50mm f1.8 shone, it did well. But my 100mm macro shines consistently! 8)
My next 'dream' prime / wishlist is a fast prime 50mm lens that has great bokeh, fantastic sharpness and good contrast WIDE OPEN, and has USM focussing. F1.8 is enough for me, though of course a f1.4 would even be nicer, but not necessary. I don't want a big, expensive lens. Several reviews show that at f1.4, the Canon f1.4 isn't really sharp / contrasty. So f1.8 is sufficient. The Canon 50mm f1.2 L is really beyond what I want. Most important to me is that around f1.8 or f2, I want it to be GOOD, very good on all levels mentioned above. I don't need weather sealing for it. The Sigma 50mm f1.4 has some good reviews, but also there are QC and focus issues.
An icing on the cake would be for it to have a good (eg 4 stop) IS. A man can dream, can't he? From the sale of my 3 lenses, I have put the funds aside to save up for such a lens. Even if a 50mm f1.8 III (ie new / replacement lens) will be above what the current 50mm f1.4, I'm happy to pay for it, if the IQ is good. If there will be a 50mm f1.4 II, I hope it's similar to the size of the current Canon 50mm f1.4. I'd be a bit disappointed if the price of a Canon 50mm f1.4 II will be significantly higher (even if its not an L) than what they could make a 50mm f1.8 III for.
Time will tell.... :
Paul
Among those I sold was the Canon 50mm f1.8 (for your info, the other two were the Canon 28-135mm USM IS, and the Canon 100-300 USM).
The 50mm f1.8 had superb qualities in some settings, (and yes, I had a 'decent' copy - in fact I initially had a copy that back focussed, and returned for this one which was better). On my Canon 350D body, its focus performance was weak. It was better on my Canon 7D, however still not to my liking.
I have decided that I probably won't get any lens that doesn't have USM / HSM (equivalent) focussing. The 'jittery-ness' and the noise and lack of focus flexibility (eg slower speed, apparent lack of fine accuracy, full-time manual focus) bugged me with the 50mm f1.8 in particular, as I mainly wanted it for critical applications (between f1.8 and f2.8).
Friends, I do realise "there is a very fine depth of field at f1.8" - I am aware of that, and I have used other lenses with a similarly shallow depth of field. The 50mm f1.8 just didn't meet my needs consistently. Focus accuracy and usability were the main issues I had with mine - even after I applied a systematic use - and noticeable improvement with my 7Ds manual focus adjustment (MFA).
So at the moment, the only prime that I have is the Canon 100mm macro USM (nonL)- which is a lens I really enjoy using. Obviously it serves superbly as a macro (where I usually use it hand-held with live-view). But in addition I ended up preferring it over the 50mm f1.8 for casual portraits and subject isolation (eg objects / still life). I expect to keep this lens. My copy focusses fast, consistently, even with very small dof settings. I get a very high keeper rate, whereas the 50mm f1.8 keeper rate was so-so, which annoyed me. When the 50mm f1.8 shone, it did well. But my 100mm macro shines consistently! 8)
My next 'dream' prime / wishlist is a fast prime 50mm lens that has great bokeh, fantastic sharpness and good contrast WIDE OPEN, and has USM focussing. F1.8 is enough for me, though of course a f1.4 would even be nicer, but not necessary. I don't want a big, expensive lens. Several reviews show that at f1.4, the Canon f1.4 isn't really sharp / contrasty. So f1.8 is sufficient. The Canon 50mm f1.2 L is really beyond what I want. Most important to me is that around f1.8 or f2, I want it to be GOOD, very good on all levels mentioned above. I don't need weather sealing for it. The Sigma 50mm f1.4 has some good reviews, but also there are QC and focus issues.
An icing on the cake would be for it to have a good (eg 4 stop) IS. A man can dream, can't he? From the sale of my 3 lenses, I have put the funds aside to save up for such a lens. Even if a 50mm f1.8 III (ie new / replacement lens) will be above what the current 50mm f1.4, I'm happy to pay for it, if the IQ is good. If there will be a 50mm f1.4 II, I hope it's similar to the size of the current Canon 50mm f1.4. I'd be a bit disappointed if the price of a Canon 50mm f1.4 II will be significantly higher (even if its not an L) than what they could make a 50mm f1.8 III for.
Time will tell.... :
Paul
Upvote
0
Forgive me prime lenses for I have sinned! I have just ordered a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II...
So the TS-E 17mm I was also wishing will have to wait...
It was either a lens that it will partially replace my 70-200 f/4 IS when there is not enough light or a specialized one that will give me more options but I will not use so often.
(I just hope that my TS-E24mm will be wide enough...)
So the TS-E 17mm I was also wishing will have to wait...
It was either a lens that it will partially replace my 70-200 f/4 IS when there is not enough light or a specialized one that will give me more options but I will not use so often.
(I just hope that my TS-E24mm will be wide enough...)
Upvote
0
If Santa has room in the sack for a 135 f/2 & a 400 f/2.8 I'll be good as gold for all of 2012.
But seriously, the 400 f/2.8 will be a somewhat reluctant purchase to go with the 1DX.
With the 300 f/2.8 on the APS-H Mk4 with 1.3X you get 390mm. I'm not prepared to give away that reach with the full frame 1DX. I think Canon will see a spike in 400 f/2.8 sales once the 1DX starts shipping.
If the Mk4 is the last APS-H Canon, there may be unusual demand for them in the second hand market for the next few years.
The 135 f/2? Hell, I just want one!
Paul Wright
But seriously, the 400 f/2.8 will be a somewhat reluctant purchase to go with the 1DX.
With the 300 f/2.8 on the APS-H Mk4 with 1.3X you get 390mm. I'm not prepared to give away that reach with the full frame 1DX. I think Canon will see a spike in 400 f/2.8 sales once the 1DX starts shipping.
If the Mk4 is the last APS-H Canon, there may be unusual demand for them in the second hand market for the next few years.
The 135 f/2? Hell, I just want one!
Paul Wright
Upvote
0
C
cezargalang
Guest
Own : 50mm 1.8 :'( :'( :'(
Wish: 35mm 1.4L and a sigma 85mm 1.4
Wish i went for primes earlier T_T
Wish: 35mm 1.4L and a sigma 85mm 1.4
Wish i went for primes earlier T_T
Upvote
0
R
razorite
Guest
i own
- 35mm 1.4 L
- 100mm 2.8 L is
- 50mm 1.2 L
wishlist
- 15mm 2.8 fisheye
- 300mm f/4L is
- 24mm 1.4L ii
- 35mm 1.4 L
- 100mm 2.8 L is
- 50mm 1.2 L
wishlist
- 15mm 2.8 fisheye
- 300mm f/4L is
- 24mm 1.4L ii
Upvote
0
I had the Canon 85mm f/1.8 on my wishlist. Just yesterday purchased it. I will use it for indoor portraits in the upcoming holiday days. And I will use it in January for an upcoming indoor soccer tournement.
First impressions are great. Also, a light lens to carry!
First impressions are great. Also, a light lens to carry!
Upvote
0
J
J. McCabe
Guest
I have
Canon EF 15mm f/2.8
Canon EF 35mm f/2
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM
Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II
Samyang 8mm f/3.5
On my wishlist are
Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L USM - cause I love wide & fast
Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM - cause I love wide & fast
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM - for portraits
Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM - for portraits
One of the new super teles - so I could sell it, and use the money to buy EF 8-15mm f/4 L
Canon EF 15mm f/2.8
Canon EF 35mm f/2
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM
Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II
Samyang 8mm f/3.5
On my wishlist are
Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L USM - cause I love wide & fast
Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM - cause I love wide & fast
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM - for portraits
Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM - for portraits
One of the new super teles - so I could sell it, and use the money to buy EF 8-15mm f/4 L
Upvote
0
Prime lenses I currently own:
EF 85mm f/1.8
EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro
Prime lenses on my wishlist:
EF 50mm f/1.2 L
EF 85mm f/1.2 L II
EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro
EF 14mm f/2.8 L II
TS-E 17mm f/4 L Tilt-Shift
TS-E 24mm f/3.5 L II Tilt-Shift
EF 500mm f/4.0 L IS II
EF 85mm f/1.8
EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro
Prime lenses on my wishlist:
EF 50mm f/1.2 L
EF 85mm f/1.2 L II
EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro
EF 14mm f/2.8 L II
TS-E 17mm f/4 L Tilt-Shift
TS-E 24mm f/3.5 L II Tilt-Shift
EF 500mm f/4.0 L IS II
Upvote
0
Similar threads
