Sleeper Lenses?

[babiesphotos.ca]

Tamron 28-75 2.8
Much smaller and lighter than either 24-70, and perfect all around lens. 2.8 all the way, goes up to 75, where I often found myself taking portraits.

Copy I had was quite sharp in the centre, in line with Tamron 24-70, but edges aren't it's thing.
However, for people pictures, great. Also inexpensive, small, travel alternative.

They say focus is slow. I don't agree, but it's loud, which makes it appear slower... Vanity made me upgrade to Tamron 24-70, but I'm not sure I'm getting better pictures now...

 

[MLfan3]

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

well, I love my 100f2USM lens and I think it is an L quality lens.
I also love my old Nikon AIS105mmf2.5 on my D800 and my 6D via adapter.
I also love Samyang 8mm fisheye lens.
I think the 35mm f2ISUSM is also a great sleeper lens ,everybody loves the Sigma or the L and seldom talks about this lens but I think the new IS version of 35mm f2 is one of the best Canon primes.

 

[rt]

Underrated lenses:

• EF 135L ("so old!", "no IS") -- I hesitated waaay too long before I bought it...
• EF 35mm f/2 -- very sharp in center (in corners not so much), short minimum focusing distance, very accurate AF -- this is a viable alternative to my 24-70 f/2.8 Mk II in many situations, it's way lighter, it's way smaller. I often use it for video (manual focus is very OK, fairly accurate and barely audible). It's excellent for closeup portraits, with face details, like eyes.

Overrated lenses:

• EF 85mm f/1.8 -- no contrast, AF often misses (which negates the overall sharpness argument).
• EF-S 15-85mm f/1.8 -- AF unacceptable for a walkaround zoom.

This is all on crop, 7D, BTW.

 

[mrsfotografie]

Samyang 14mm: One of the most arty lenses I own. The 'moustache' distortion is no dealbreaker for my use of this lens. Excellent sharpness and colors and the (self added) addition of an AF confirmation chip makes it sweet to use (MF is otherwise almost impossible due to the large DOF in the viewfinder, even with an EF-S screen). Costs next to nothing too compared to the 14mm L. Fully open it can create some wicked lens flare (that I like), but only fully open.

Sigma 20 mm: I have an excellent copy. Little known is that this lens creates fabulous bokeh when used up close and personal (The tiny MFD is the absolute strong point of this one), and I like the lens flare with the sun in the frame.

EF 35mm f/2: Not a perfect lens but due to its modest dimensions & weight it's fabulous for low light application when travelling.

 

[mb66energy]

.
The most underrated, overlooked lens I have is the EF-S 60mm macro. It does everything from macro to landscapes and usually gives a unique look.
...

+1

If I had to do photography with an APS-C body and 1 single lens my EF-S 60 would be the one! It was my first lens with the 20D and the reason to switch from my G2 to the DSLR boat.

 

[adhocphotographer]

Tokina 300mm 2.8 is meant to be a hidden gem, that and the Tokina 17mm f/3.5 AF. I don't own either of these lenses, but i would like to!

 

[pwp]

I've always considered the Canon EF 300mm f/4Lis to be one of the great "sleepers" of the Canon range.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_300mm_lens

I got one when they first shipped in 1997 and was astounded with what it could deliver at f/4 right up to the time I upgraded to the 300 f/2.8is. Honestly, I wish I'd hung onto the 300 f/4is. There is room in my life for two Canon 300mm lenses. Sure, you can hear the IS working away from 20 paces, but it more than makes up for this irrelevant shortcoming with it's very light weight, compact size (about the same as a 70-200) brilliantly sharp images wide open and its almost macro minimum focus distance of 1.5m. Great for a unique portrait, plus I used to shoot great food shots with it.

Hell....I'm going to get another one!

-PW

 

[symmar22]

For me it's the TS-E 90mm. It is hardly ever mentioned, although the image quality is excellent.

This one is on my wish list for sure...

+2 on the TS-E 90mm, I recently bought a 100mm Macro IS L that I love, but when I work with a tripod for close-ups (like flowers), I most of the time end using the 90 TS-E, since it's as sharp (if not more than the macro), and the tilt is a feature that cannot be replaced.

Another lens no one ever talks about is my 50mm f2.5 Compact Macro. It's light, cheap, has zero distortion, a perfectly flat field, and is brutally sharp until the very corners from f5.6.
The drawbacks are : no USM, only 1:2 macro (not very important for a 50mm IMO), it is soft in the corners and has lot of vignetting until f4. It's not a very good looking lens either .

For subjects that require lots of DoF (landscape and architecture), it's probably the best Canon 50mm. Having been designed in 1987, it's one of the 2 oldest lenses in the Canon catalogue, (with the 135 f2.8 Soft Focus), it might be time that Canon replaces it. However for 269$ (B&H), it's a steal.

 

[pato]

I really like my old Sigma 400mm F/5.6 APO Macro HSM on my 550D. Great reach, quite fast AF, but sadly not re-chipped and thus no F/5.6.
Anyway, a really nice lens and great for birding

 

[cwild]

I would have to say the Leica 35-70mm f4 R on a Leitax adapter.

I have a 16-35 ii, 24-70i and 70-200 ii, but the Leica is by far my favorite lens for Landscapes, I just love the 'look' that it gives to my images.

 

[mrsfotografie]

I've always considered the Canon EF 300mm f/4Lis to be one of the great "sleepers" of the Canon range.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_300mm_lens

I got one when they first shipped in 1997 and was astounded with what it could deliver at f/4 right up to the time I upgraded to the 300 f/2.8is. Honestly, I wish I'd hung onto the 300 f/4is. There is room in my life for two Canon 300mm lenses. Sure, you can hear the IS working away from 20 paces, but it more than makes up for this irrelevant shortcoming with it's very light weight, compact size (about the same as a 70-200) brilliantly sharp images wide open and its almost macro minimum focus distance of 1.5m. Great for a unique portrait, plus I used to shoot great food shots with it.

Hell....I'm going to get another one!

-PW

This lens fascinates me, considering getting one despite the fact that I already have a 70-200 F/2.8 ISII + 1.4TC II and a 100-400L. This however makes it difficult to justify because I don't want to part with these two lenses anyway.

 

[crasher8]

100 f/2
135L f/2
200L 2.8

Sigma 17-50 2.8 for Crop
Anything made by Lensbaby (If you haven't tried a composer you are missing out on a LOT of fun)

 

[bchernicoff]

Sigma 17-50 2.8 for Crop

+1 I loved it when I used a 7D. Since then two friends have bought one based on my recommendation and they love theirs.

 

[insanitybeard]

The most underrated, overlooked lens I have is the EF-S 60mm macro. It does everything from macro to landscapes and usually gives a unique look. I can usually tell a picture taken with this lens.

I agree with this, the EF-S 60 is probably my sharpest lens, and that's including the 70-200 f4 IS. Get the focus right and it's corner to corner sharp (macro obviously excepted-unless photographing a brick wall!), even at 100% on the 7D. Compact as well, and great value!

 

[paul13walnut5]

100 f/2
135L f/2
200L 2.8

Sigma 17-50 2.8 for Crop
Anything made by Lensbaby (If you haven't tried a composer you are missing out on a LOT of fun)

Never owned the 135 f2, but I have, or have had everything else here, well the previous 18-50 f2.8 DC Macro version of the Sigma, which is also a great lens, and cheap used.

 

[TBenson]

I agree with this, the EF-S 60 is probably my sharpest lens, and that's including the 70-200 f4 IS. Get the focus right and it's corner to corner sharp (macro obviously excepted-unless photographing a brick wall!), even at 100% on the 7D. Compact as well, and great value!

It is so compact that you can use a camera's built-in flash for macro without the lens casting a shadow. Great for travel. And the EF-S 60 is a good focal length for portraits and is sharp wide-open.

Only downside: it hunts during focus sometimes. I wish it had a focusing distance limiter switch to help.

 

[drmikeinpdx]

Tamron 28-75 2.8 non-stabilized

Tamron 28-75 2.8

Agreed, this is a great lens for someone who has switched to full frame, but doesn't have the budget for L lenses. I keep mine around for backup.

I also have a friend who shoots lots and lots of people pix with this lens on a 7D. Its a nice portrait lens on a crop body.

 

[mrsfotografie]

Re: Tamron 28-75 2.8 non-stabilized

Tamron 28-75 2.8

Agreed, this is a great lens for someone who has switched to full frame, but doesn't have the budget for L lenses. I keep mine around for backup.

I also have a friend who shoots lots and lots of people pix with this lens on a 7D. Its a nice portrait lens on a crop body.

This was excellent when I had it and used it on my 40D (now sold). For my 7D (which I normally use only with long lenses) I have a Tamron 17-50mm F/2,8 and it's absolutely fabulous.

 

[Chapaboy]

Well.. I have a Macro Tokina 100 f2.8 This Baby ROCKS! I got it for 250 bucks on ebay and it was pretty much new.Few months back I had some money trouble and I had to sell canon 70-200L and many other lenses and cameras but I kept this one until I got a couple of new cameras.

As a Macro is wonderful! as portrait is is a dream. Every time I mention this lens everyone goes like HUH! what is that?

 

[preppyak]

Tamron 28-75 2.8
Much smaller and lighter than either 24-70, and perfect all around lens. 2.8 all the way, goes up to 75, where I often found myself taking portraits.

Yeah, its a solid portrait lens; not so great on full-frame for landscape, etc. But compared to the used prices on the 24-70 f/2.8 v1, it's an absolute steal.

I mostly used it on APS-C, and while I loved the shots it took, I never found the range quite wide enough.

200L 2.8

Yep, dropped my 70-200 f/4L IS and got this instead, much more useful for AF, teleconverters, etc, and a lot less conspicuous