Canon's Top 3 lenses....

[AdrianvBarrera]

Hi,


Just about to purchase some Canon lenses. Would like your opinion on what you guys think are Canons top three lenses in terms of sharpness and contrast.


I am coming from a Nikon/Contax arena and am not familiar with Canons better lenses. Although I have learned that the L series are suppose to be top of the line.

I know that this is a generalization of Canon lenses and that some of you will say well what are you going to use them for. My answer to that is that although I am an amateur I shoot everything and at one time or another will use most focal lengths.




Thanks,
Adrian

[Pekka]

See http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html for sharpness evaluations.

Other considerations when choosing top lenses, are color reproduction, flare quality, bokeh, distortion, feel and charm etc. These are not measured anywhere, so before you buy try the lenses out.

My top lens is definitely 70-200 f/2.8L, although 50 f/1.4 comes close - the only flaw in 50mm is a very slight barrel distortion. Haven't seen any flaws in 70-200 yet, unless you consider weight to be a flaw. But I'm not an L evangelist, I use Sigma, too (try Sigma 20/1.8!) and will get e.g. 35/2 because I need that focal often.

Other lenses I consider to be very good buys (and what I'd lke to have) are 16-35/2.8L, 28-70/2.8L, 35/2, 50/2.5 Macro, EF 85/1.2L, 100/2.8 Macro, 135/2L, 70-200/4 L and 100-400/4,5-5,6L IS

[KHogan]

I have to concur with Pekka on the 35 f/2 lens. I originally purchased the 50mm lens but found it too long with the 1.6 multiplier. I couldn't get used to it although it's a very nice lens. I really wanted something closer to a "normal" lens. I decided to try out the 35 f/2 and haven't looked back since. I very very rarely use the 50mm now mostly because of the focal length. Since you mention sharpness and contrast as criteria, I can say that this lens will not disappoint in these areas if you're looking for this focal lens. Superb lens.

Good luck!
Kharim

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Adrian,

I really like the EF135 f/2 L. All the images in these galleries were shot with this lens:

http://www.rogercavanagh.com/EF135/index.htm
http://www.rogercavanagh.com/meerkats/index.htm
http://www.rogercavanagh.com/at_the_zoo/index.htm

Regards,

Roger

[AdrianvBarrera]

Roger,



Thanks for the images....Very nice work.





Adrian

[toycollector]

You know the snowball effect of how one thing leads to another.....

I really like the 28-70 2.8L but soon discovered it won't work with the built-in flash. The lens barrel is so large, it casts a dark half circle shadow on your picture. If you haven't invested in a flash yet, you may have issues with some of the larger lenses...

[Rudi]

Adrian,

As far as my little collection goes, my recommendations are the 50mm f/1.4 and the 70-200mm f/4 L.

50/1.4 - a wonderful prime lens. Well built, sharp, very nice portrait and low light lens.

70-200 f/4 L - if you don't need the extra stop of the f/2.8 version of this zoom, this is the one to get. Half the weight, a pleasure to use. Balances well on the D30. Everything is just in the right position so you can zoom, focus, flick the AF switches on and off, all without taking your eye away from the viewfinder. When I bought it a couple of weeks ago, it felt like I've owned this one before, and was coming back to it. I've only had it for a couple of weeks, but it already is my favourite lens. It doesn't hurt that it combines the convenience of a zoom with the optical performace of a prime, either. :)

HTH,

[Hartmut]

The Top Zooms:
28-70/2.8 L
70-200/2.8 L IS
100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS
Regards
Hartmut

[Alan H]

I love my "L's" 70-200 f2.8, 28-70 f2.8 and 17-35mm f2.8. I used to shoot Contax RTS I, IIs, & IIIs. I kept my Contax 645.

Alan

[Rafael]

My top 3 Canon lenses are:

17-35 2.8, 50 1.4 and 70-200 2.8

These are my only lenses too :-)

[AdrianvBarrera]

It is interesting that most people agree on Canons top 3 lenses. The most intriguing part is that these lenses are all zooms.

Hardly anyone mentioned any prime lenses.


Are Canons zoom lenses just as good as their primes? or is it just that the convenience of zooms justify the minute loss of quality over primes?


I know for sure that in the Nikon arena the primes beat the zooms flat out.


Adrian

[DoctorMoth]

From what I've gathered the Canon primes on the longer focal lengths are considered by most wildlife and nature photographers I think to be the absolute best (300mm, 400mm, 500mm 600mm). The only Canon zoom I ever see referenced in those terms (ie. in photography journals, magazines, books, and websites devoted to wildlife and nature landscapes) is the 100-400 L IS zoom, which has superb optics and can be used with the canon 1.4 teleconverter with minimal loss of resolution. As to other purposes these lenses I think might be overkill due to their focal length but more importantly they are quite ponderous to use other than on a tripod due to their incredible size and weight. The 600mm is something like 12 or 13 pounds. And then there is the price tag on these monsters, although the 100-400 is quite a bargain I think (In NY I think you can pick one up for $1300 or so).

[ethan1219]

i have to go with the 70 200 2.8 IS...love the lens...
i also have the sigma 24 70 2.8 which is a great value compared to the canon lens that most closely matches it.

[bbcoach51]

I'd have to go with the 17-35 2.8, 28-70 2.8 & 70-200 2.8 IS. Another not mentioned that you might consider if you can only take one lens along is the 35-350 L. Not the fastest but great range and it's L glass.

Butch

[CJMORGAN59]

toycollector wrote:
I really like the 28-70 2.8L but soon discovered it won't work with the built-in flash. The lens barrel is so large, it casts a dark half circle shadow on your picture. If you haven't invested in a flash yet, you may have issues with some of the larger lenses...


If we go to the trouble of using a camera like a D60 (or one of the others) and a lens like a 28-70 2.8L, it seems mostly a waste to then use the tiny, dinky, almost functionally useless built-in camera flash. Or so it seems to me.

[Karl]

My favorite 2 (and only 2 I own at the moment, really struggling to find a good wide):

28-70mm f/2.8L (a MUST own, sharpest lens i've ever used)

70-200mm f/2.8L IS (You'll get shots you never thought you could, and still sharper than any non-L prime)

[clkgtr37]

Just to put my two cents in on this one. My favorite 3 lenses are the Sigma 15-30 3.5-4.5 EX, Canon EF 70-200 2.8 IS, and Canon EF 400 4 DO IS.

On a side note, I saw that many of you had good review on the Canon EF 35 f/2. I am selling mine because I have that focal range covered by my 28-70. So if anyone want at fixed 35 f/2 email me at:

clkgtr37@yahoo.com

[Jade14]

I believe some people are praising their FAVORITE or MOST POPULAR Canon lenses, not necesarily those that are optically superior. The D30 is already demanding on lenses. It requires lenses that deliver 50 linepairs per mm. Not many lenses can do that. You can confirm this at http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html Check their Modulation Transfer Functions charts at a contrast level of 30+%.

The D60 is even more demanding, since there are more, smaller photosites in the same imaging area. If you plan on making large enlargements (13 x19 inches @ 300dpi) you DO need every bit of detail. Canon Primes are definitely sharper than any zoom (L or not). The 135 f2 is sharper than the already very good 70-200 2.8. The 100 f2 and 85 1.8 have astonishing color and contrast. The 50 1.4 has a metal mount, USM (for real-time AF fine tuning) and better construction and sealing than the 50 1.8 (which performs amazingly for the price). The 50 1.4 achieves excellent edge-to-edge definition from 2.8 down (the 50 1.8 needs f 5.6 to get that edge-to-edge definition). For a normal viewing angle on a D30/60, the 35 F2 lens is indeed very good.

The Canon 24 2.8 is a winner as far as wide angle corner definition is concerned. The 20 2.8 has noticeable less distortion, better edge definition and contrast than the 20-35 L, 17-35 L, and even the new 16-35 L. If you need to go wider ( a 20 mm only provides the equivalent of a 32 mm viewing angle) and plan on printing very large, the high-res way to go is to stitch several images together.

The original poster stated he works with Contax cameras and lenses, so I assume he has high standards. To print only ocasionally above 8x10 and not very detailed scenes (large groups of people, landscape or architecture) almost any lens will do. To really see the difference produced by a superior lens your shooting AND image processing technique (that includes Upsampling and Unsharp Masking) needs to be very good. Please see: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=2741044

Jorge Alban
Costa Rica
Central America

[droosan]

On (image quality)/(price) in the $1000. Of course, I think the 28-135IS is good enough for most uses, and there's no underestimating the power of IS. Another consideration for a camera with a 1.6 focal length factor is the 24-85. Also be aware that zooms have smaller apertures which will make low light focusing with the D30/60 even more difficult.

I haven't tried the 35/2 but that would probably be the best normal prime for a D30/60

If you can afford it the EF200/1.8 is optically the best lens photodo has ever tested from any manufacture. With 1.6x that's a nice lens for many sports.