The Official Camera Lens Thread™

[Nick]

Welcome to the official discussion of camera lenses. Here we will share information, uses, techniques, experience, and generally anything lenses for your SLR or DSLR camera.

:thumbsup

I'll start this off by talking about what I have had my eye on for a little while now, but am not exactly ready to pull the trigger on the purchase of a Canon 85mm L f/1.2 Prime. There are two versions of this lens though. The Mark I and Mark II version. The MKII is obviously the newest and most expensive (approximately double that of a used MKI version from what I have found).

Differences, the MKI version has "slower" USM and some lens flaring compared to the upgraded MKII which corrects these issues.

I'm of the mind set that a used MKI version with filtering would correct most of the "lens flare" issue, but that's also considering you are shooing toward the sun or a direct light source.

Opinions? I think I should go with the MKI, because after all it is in face L "Luxury" Canon glass, the amazing Bokeh, clarity and low light usability is something that can't be looked over, and it's really not worth upgrading for these reasons alone for double the price.

[Nick]

Current lenses in my arsenal are my Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L USM non IS, Canon 50mm 1.4 USM, 24-105 f/4 L USM IS (Came with the 5D at a huge ~$400 discount).

I sold my Sigma 17-70 which was a nice lens, and my 10-22 USM EF-S lens (does not work on full frame bodies).

I would love a 35mm L prime and the 85mm L prime.

[DirtyMax]

I own:
Canon 70-200 f2.8L
Canon 28-135 f4-5.6 IS (got with 50D.. somewhat for sale)
Sigma 50-500 f4-6.3 (also sort of looking to sell)
Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6
Canon 50 f1.8 II
Canon 85 f1.8
Canon 55-250 f4-5.6 IS (sale pending).

My short list of wants includes one of the folowing once I decide:
Canon 24-70 f2.8L
Sigma 24-70 f2.8
Canon 24-105 f4L

If anyone is thinking of purchasing any of these, I'd be happy to share real-world experiences on any of them. If we're ever all assembled and you want to give one a while, mi casa'.... :thumbsup

[udlose98]

Id be interesting to see a few pics attached to the lenses described.

[twirkin50]

Have a 85mm f/1.8 and a 50mm f/1.8. So far I mainly use during my daughters basketball games. The 85 works awesome! I have used the 85 and 50 for other indoor events (B-days, Christmas..) and am very happy with everything. I just got into photography in December and am hooked!

Future purchase is either a 70-200 or 135 prime.

[Cleveland Dave]

i have the kit lens 18-55 and a 50 f/1.8 i used to have the 85mm f/1.8 but ended up selling it when i needed some money.

next lens i want is a 70-200 f/4L

[Nick]

next lens i want is a 70-200 f/4L


Dave,

It is my strong recommendation to not waste your money on the 70-200 f4.

I had that one and sold for the 2.8.

The NON IS 2.8 version is basically the same price (last I looked) and performs so much better in lower light situations, have greater Bokeh and the weight helps balance things out (counters my camera wobble). I like a little weight to my camera stuff though. Maybe i'm odd.

f/4 is $1099 at newegg.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830998149

f/2.8 is $1,169 at newegg.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830998378

The benefits of this is that in my opinion, Image Stabilization is not necessary as it's a faster (more light allowed in) lens. so prolonged exposure may not be necessary in certain situations where you would absolutely need it with the f/4.

Also if you plan on panning, and this is my personal preference, I prefer to pan without IS on because the focussing was thrown off due to the IS lag in the lens. Just my experience, and yes, I had the IS on the horizontal mode for anyone who may want to counter that.

Non-IS panning with the 2.8
http://abn.smugmug.com/photos/335041824_JMCVF-M-4.jpg
http://abn.smugmug.com/photos/335041023_nnHzs-M-4.jpg
http://abn.smugmug.com/photos/335304469_zzVk9-M-4.jpg

[twirkin50]

Anyone try the Sigma 70/200 f/2.8?

[udlose98]

I have my kit 18-55 AF-S IS
55-200 Af-s IS
50 mm 1.8D (just bought)

[Z28Envy]

You guys have some really nice gear!:thumbsup

I don't have anything impressive but I am new to this so what I have seems to work out so far.

I have a:

Tamron 28-200 3.8 - 5.6

canon 50mm 1.8

18-55 kit lens

I still shoot with a 300D yet as well. Been looking at getting an xsi but need to get a couple repairs done on the car first before it gets nice out! The 300D has preformed well for me.

Not sure what lens to go with next.

[johnny--2k]

I've got my 18-55 kit that is not doing so hot, so it sits on the counter, unused.

My main lens is a Tamron 18-250 and I also have an older 28-200 that I no longer use either.

.25x Reducer for the "fish-eye" effect

and probably soon a 50MM 1.8

[jamest]

Welcome to the official discussion of camera lenses. Here we will share information, uses, techniques, experience, and generally anything lenses for your SLR or DSLR camera.

:thumbsup

I'll start this off by talking about what I have had my eye on for a little while now, but am not exactly ready to pull the trigger on the purchase of a Canon 85mm L f/1.2 Prime. There are two versions of this lens though. The Mark I and Mark II version. The MKII is obviously the newest and most expensive (approximately double that of a used MKI version from what I have found).

Differences, the MKI version has "slower" USM and some lens flaring compared to the upgraded MKII which corrects these issues.

I'm of the mind set that a used MKI version with filtering would correct most of the "lens flare" issue, but that's also considering you are shooing toward the sun or a direct light source.

Opinions? I think I should go with the MKI, because after all it is in face L "Luxury" Canon glass, the amazing Bokeh, clarity and low light usability is something that can't be looked over, and it's really not worth upgrading for these reasons alone for double the price.

Pony up the cash and get the MKII version. Why limit yourself with the possilbility that something might or might not work with MKI version. Otherwise test the MKI version with you filter solution and see what happens.

[JohnnyT]

Super new here.

I have the 18-55 kit lens and just bought an 18-200 AF-S VR f/3.5. I want to see how much I shoot and how well I do before I purchase a big dog lens like you all... :)

I am also thinking about a f/1.4 50 prime.

[Nick]

Pony up the cash and get the MKII version. Why limit yourself with the possilbility that something might or might not work with MKI version. Otherwise test the MKI version with you filter solution and see what happens.

That's an extra $1000. Here let me just reach in my pocket and grab that.

:stare

[jamest]

That's an extra $1000. Here let me just reach in my pocket and grab that.

:stare

Well you did ask for opinions. :) Have you tested the MKI version with a filter?

[Nick]

No, but that's not too much of a concern because that would be something related to direct light shooting or shooting without a hood. The MKII meters distance data for flash performance I just read. You're right though. It may be worth it with all of the upgrades in the technology to get the MKII.
That's a while off though. Lots of money for that lens.

I appreciate your opinion.

[Nick]

Sold my 24-105 f/4L and picked up the 24-70 2.8L to go with my 70-200 2.8L

Now I just want my 85mm. :mad:

[Goat Roper]

Sold my 24-105 f/4L and picked up the 24-70 2.8L to go with my 70-200 2.8L

Now I just want my 85mm. :mad:

Love my 24-70. Quick but heavy as hell but balances nicely if you have a battery brip.

Like I said in that other thread (whoops), the MKII improvements make it worth the cash but you will end up buying it new, or at least you should, for the minute diff in cost.