2 new lenses, initial impressions... [Archive] - Canon Digital Photography Forums

View Full Version : 2 new lenses, initial impressions...

billh101

17th of March 2005 (Thu), 06:32

Well, add me to the list of people who just got some new equipment. I'd been using the 20d with the cheap kit lens for a couple months and just yesterday I got the 70-200 2.8L and the 17-40 4L. Let me start by saying that I had thought I had a pretty good copy of the kit lens. But, now that I've shot with that 70-200, wow, my perspective has changed. I've only taken a few head shots of the wife and kids in my living room so far, but I'm seeing pores in the skin and detail that I've never seen before. That lens is SHARP! I now understand why people endure the size and weight. It's definitely a "wow" lens. I can't wait to get outside this weekend and do some more shooting with it. Another observation that I've made is that being a much faster aperture than the kit lens, it's bright enough that I can now accurately manual focus, even wide open. I could never manually focus accurately with the kit lens. It took me about 10 seconds to fall in love with that lens. :-) The jury is still out on the 17-40. I'm going to wait to fully judge it until I get outside and try some landscape shots with it. Even without the hood on it , the lens blocks part of the pop up flash and I got some lens flare from a lamp in my living room. (I think it was flare anyway, I had a little purple splotch on a couple shots.) It did have a nice feel to it though. I think I'm just going to have to get used to shooting with that one a little bit. I love wide angles, so I have high hopes for this one. Anyway, my plan was to leave the kit lens on for point-and-shoot/snapshot kind of pics and use the L lenses for serious shooting, but after trying out the new lenses last night, I didn't have the heart to put the kit lens back on the camera.
-Bill

malla1962

17th of March 2005 (Thu), 07:09

my kit lens went on ebay before i got my 17-40.

Deckyon

17th of March 2005 (Thu), 07:41

I have the 16-35mm f/2.8 L and love it. Not a single complaint. Can't speak on the 17-40... If you want an awesome lens for the difference in the wide and tele, look at the 42-70mm f/2.8 L. Another absolute winner of a lens.

As to the 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS, my absolute favorite lens. It is on my camera more than any other lens I own. My best shots are with that lens. It was the best purchase I made for my kit, even though I bought it all at once.

I would skip the 50 (even though I have one myself) and sell the kit lens and save for the 24-70mm f/2.8 L. You will not regret it.

As to the flash, get an off-camera flash, like the 420EX, 550EX or 580EX. The 580EX is the best and gives awesome exposure and control.

Dubsta

17th of March 2005 (Thu), 08:10

Awesome post! Thanks...all these posts about the 70-200 are really swaying my decision!

Post a pic for us!

billh101

17th of March 2005 (Thu), 08:54

Awesome post! Thanks...all these posts about the 70-200 are really swaying my decision!

Post a pic for us!

I've never posted a pic, so I'll have to look into how I do that. I actually been primarily shooting film until quite recently, so I have a lot to learn about digital yet.

The 70-200 2.8L is an expensive lens. It's not easy to justify it if this is a hobby and not what you do for a living. But, all I can say is, I doubt you'd be disappointed if you go for it. I'd heard it was a sharp lens, but it even surprised me how good this lens seems to be. When I shot film, my favorite lens was my Nikon 85mm prime. Well, this 70-200 has made me forget all about that lens. :-) I had considered the f4 version, the Sigma, and the 200 L prime. But, in the end, I'm glad I have all the flexibility this one has to offer with the fast aperture. I figure I'd rather bite the bullet once and have a superb lens to use for years to come than go cheaper just to get something and then wish for something different and want to upgrade anyway. Buy within your means, of course, but if you call pull off spending the money on this lens, I bet you'll be glad you did.
-Bill

Deckyon

17th of March 2005 (Thu), 09:21

Here are some of my favorites with the 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS lens. The links below the image go to my website where you can view the full image information. This is an awesome lens, worth every penny.

Click on the thumbnails for full-sized images

http://www.sturmphoto.com/images/demo/floating_th.jpg (http://www.sturmphoto.com/images/demo/floating_800.jpg)
Camera: Canon EOS-1D Mark II - Handheld
Aperture: f/2.8
ISO: 200
Exposure time: 1/100 s
Focal length: 70mm
http://www.sturmphoto.com/displayimage.php?pos=-182 (http://www.sturmphoto.com/displayimage.php?pos=-182)

http://www.sturmphoto.com/images/demo/Louisville_th.jpg (http://www.sturmphoto.com/images/demo/Louisville_800.jpg)
Camera: Canon EOS-1D Mark II
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO: 200
Exposure time: 2 s
Focal length: 70mm
http://www.sturmphoto.com/displayimage.php?pos=-198

http://www.sturmphoto.com/images/demo/eagle_th.jpg (http://www.sturmphoto.com/images/demo/eagle_800.jpg)
Camera: Canon EOS-1D Mark II - Handheld w/ 2x Extender II
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO: 200
Exposure time: 1/1600 s
Focal length: 255mm
http://www.sturmphoto.com/displayimage.php?pos=-177 (http://www.sturmphoto.com/displayimage.php?pos=-177)

http://www.sturmphoto.com/images/demo/heron_th.jpg (http://www.sturmphoto.com/images/demo/heron_800.jpg)
Camera: Canon EOS-1D Mark II - Handheld w/ 2x Extender II
Aperture: f/11
ISO: 100
Exposure time: 1/80 s
Focal length: 400mm
http://www.sturmphoto.com/displayimage.php?pos=-176 (http://www.sturmphoto.com/displayimage.php?pos=-176)

Dubsta

17th of March 2005 (Thu), 10:28

Thanks! Those are amazing shots!

alan sh

17th of March 2005 (Thu), 10:44

Persian-Rice

17th of March 2005 (Thu), 10:46

Congrats on the buy, those are two of Canonst finest lenses.

BTW guys, why does everyone assume that he has a 2.8 IS, I think he would say so if it was. This is the case everywhere, not only this thread. Maybe you guys don't know that Canon makes a f/2.8 non IS model. :D

Alan SH, a 17-40 comes with a hood.

alan sh

17th of March 2005 (Thu), 10:50

malla1962

18th of March 2005 (Fri), 06:41

just got my 17-40,pic taken in j-peg with no photoshop sharpening.

mr.photoguy

18th of March 2005 (Fri), 07:12

mmmmmmmmmmmmmm... Dinner.

eosster

18th of March 2005 (Fri), 10:39

mmmmmmmmmmmmmm... Dinner.

LMAO,

Hellashot

18th of March 2005 (Fri), 10:42

just got my 17-40,pic taken in j-peg with no photoshop sharpening.

It's always so hard to tell how sharp an image is when it's posted in such small formats. You cannot accurately tell how sharp an image is unless you see the full image, not resized. Whenever you make an image smaller, it can easily look sharper than it is because it's so small you cannot see details.

CPA676

18th of March 2005 (Fri), 13:21

I have the 17-40L and I have to say you will not be disappointed. You may need to buy the lens hood to avoid flare (I did) but the quality is outstanding.

I have attached a resized photo I took in Rome and a crop at 100% of a bit in the middle.

Alan

Great picture. I just purchased the 17-40L a few weeks ago and the resulting photos have been awesome. Too bad, I was in Italy last year without the L Lenses. Now I see why I need to go back. Do you think that will fly with my wife?

alan sh

18th of March 2005 (Fri), 16:32

Sure - just tell her you are taking her out to dinner. Don't tell her it's in Rome....

Alan

PS -thanks for the complement.