LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Canon EF 20-35mm f/2.8L

FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive
Thread started 06 Jun 2008 (Friday) 06:28   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
Proctorr
Senior Member
Joined Nov 2006
185 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I haven't seen one in the sticky of the lens archives, so will this be the start of it? :)

I have one waiting for me to use, but I haven't used it yet. The Canon rep said it was a true hidden gem.

Post #1, Jun 06, 2008 06:28:11


1D Mark II | 70-200mm F2.8L | 17-40mm F4.0L

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
SeattleSpeedster
Goldmember
SeattleSpeedster's Avatar
Joined Nov 2006
2,507 posts
Seattle, WA
[MORE/SHARE]

yeah i would love to see some examples...

Post #2, Jun 06, 2008 09:22:57


A7R | Zeiss 28mm f2.8 | Zeiss 50mm f1.4 | Zeiss 21mm f2.8 [COLOR=blue]| Canon 80-200mm f2.8 Magic Drainpipe | Zeiss 18mm f4 [COLOR=blue]| www.mikereidphotograph​y.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
photobitz
PlatinumMeasurebaiter
photobitz's Avatar
Joined Jan 2006
6,499 posts
Wollongong, NSW, Australia
[MORE/SHARE]

It was supposed to be pretty good except it uses the old style AFD autofocus motor so noisy, slow and no FTM :(

Post #3, Jun 06, 2008 09:51:08


Dan

My gear | Me on Flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
jacobsen1
Cream of the Crop
jacobsen1's Avatar
Joined Jan 2006
9,610 posts
Mt View, RI
[MORE/SHARE]

I had this lens for a few months while contemplating a 2.8 UWA zoom. Basically it was cheap enough I could keep it AND the 17-40 -vs- a 16-35I. It's a great lens, rock solid and nice and compact (but not light). I loved it, but ultimately I needed both wide (for lanscapes) and fast (for inside baby shots) so I had to upgrade. but if 20mm is wide enough for you and the AF noise doesn't bug you it's one hell of a lens....

IMAGE: http://gear.benjacobsenphoto.com/wp-content/gallery/canon-20-35/img_2466.jpg

IMAGE: http://gear.benjacobsenphoto.com/wp-content/gallery/canon-20-35/img_2468.jpg

and a size comparison:
IMAGE: http://gear.benjacobsenphoto.com/wp-content/gallery/canon-20-35/img_2452.jpg

Post #4, Jun 23, 2009 12:10:59 as a reply to photobitz's post over 1 year earlier.


My Gear List

my sites:
benjacobsenphoto.comexternal link | newschoolofphotography​.comexternal link
GND buyers FAQ

FOR SALE: 5Dii RRS L-bracket, 430II, 12mm macro tube PM ME!

LOG IN TO REPLY
photobitz
PlatinumMeasurebaiter
photobitz's Avatar
Joined Jan 2006
6,499 posts
Wollongong, NSW, Australia
[MORE/SHARE]

Great colours! Seems quite sharp too compared to the 17-35L that (kind of) replaced it.

Post #5, Jun 23, 2009 23:27:34


Dan

My gear | Me on Flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
bazz8
Senior Member
bazz8's Avatar
Joined Oct 2003
313 posts
South Australia,Pt.Willunga
[MORE/SHARE]

photobitz wrote in post #8163757external link
Great colours! Seems quite sharp too compared to the 17-35L that (kind of) replaced it.

Old old thread but having only today tested the difference between my 20-35 2.8L and the new for me 17-40 f4.0 L while doing some hospital waiting, I was parked near a clmn anD decided to check the difference between the 2 lenses. the 20-35 is sharper colour etc not sure checK for yourself I was also shooting through a dirty windscreen s and both shots are available light on my 1DMK3 hand held.
1668 :20-35 f2.8L
1669: 17-40 f4L
My solution keep both paid $1200 for the 20-35 over 10 yrs ago and as a carry round lens it,s great

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos.

Post #6, Apr 25, 2010 04:43:25


Gear List : SLR BODIES: Eos 5, Eos 3, D30 ( GIFT TO SON INLAW) 40D( SOLD) 1DMK3 ( Current Body)
LENSES : 28-105 USM ( WENT WITH D30) 50MM1.8 , 20-35MM F 2.8 L , 17-40MM F 4.0 L , 90MM MACRO F 2.8 TAMRON 75-300 F4-5.6 USM , 200MM MK11 2.8 L , 400mm 5.6L
TRYPOD: MANFROTTO 190 WITH MEDIUM FORMAT 3WAY HEAD, MANFROTTO MONOPOD LARGE SIZE.

LOG IN TO REPLY
cinemafia
Senior Member
cinemafia's Avatar
Joined May 2010
160 posts
Los Angeles, CA
[MORE/SHARE]

I've rented the 16-35L II for gigs several times and I love it, but like many, I couldn't afford to own it just yet. So, I bought the cheapest alternative, the 20-35L. I would say the color and sharpness are equal. Of course, with the 16-35L II you get 4mm wider view, USM, FTM, weather-sealing and a much closer MFD (that's the only thing that really bugs me!).

And, just to add to the thread, here's a couple random examples from very different settings (both were shot on my 1D MkII):

20mm, iso 160, f3.2:

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4052/4635380781_9ae9d1f0ed.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: http://www.flickr.com ...a_photography/46353​80781/]external link

35mm, iso 500, f7.1:
IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4066/4526376912_f5c1b133fe.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: http://www.flickr.com ...a_photography/45263​76912/]external link

Post #7, May 27, 2010 18:01:15 as a reply to bazz8's post 1 month earlier.


1D MkII / 20:2.8 / 24-105L / 50:1.4
portfolioexternal link / flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Morani
Hatchling
Joined Feb 2010
8 posts
Rome, Italy
[MORE/SHARE]

I bought this lens last week...
I think that this 20 years old lens is still quite good in terms of sharpness and overall IQ

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4126/4847965976_fdbe63128c_b.jpg

5d+ 20-35 @ 20mm, iso 400 f8
:D

Post #8, Aug 01, 2010 18:02:54




LOG IN TO REPLY
zacmac2112
Member
Joined Jan 2010
45 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

On Film (Rebel 2000 - provia 160 iso & drugstore negative scan)

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4138/4891346109_4e818cd94a_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: http://www.flickr.com .../adammcdowell/48913​46109/]external link
Blacktail path by TheMcDowell's, on Flickrexternal link

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4139/4891941734_984ed99ae2_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: http://www.flickr.com .../adammcdowell/48919​41734/]external link
Mammoth! by TheMcDowell's, on Flickrexternal link

And on a 30D
IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4094/4867178261_296c343a49_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: http://www.flickr.com .../adammcdowell/48671​78261/]external link
another creek brownie by TheMcDowell's, on Flickrexternal link

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4098/4867801012_43aacd3568_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: http://www.flickr.com .../adammcdowell/48678​01012/]external link
Paradise Valley Grill by TheMcDowell's, on Flickrexternal link

Post #9, Aug 16, 2010 22:25:07




LOG IN TO REPLY
niwooe
Senior Member
Joined Oct 2009
362 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

got myself a deal on the ancient Canon EF20-35mm f2.8L today, pretty sharp albeit the old age!

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4115/4913070495_4a2140fdbd_z.jpg

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4117/4913668876_f74b7c3f66_z.jpg

I know I'm late haha :D

Post #10, Aug 21, 2010 12:30:09


Canon 5D | 24L | 50L | 85L | 135L
My Flickrexternal link
My webpageexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
niwooe
Senior Member
Joined Oct 2009
362 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

looks like I'll be the only one updating this thread ;)

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4136/4932888592_2e3a6d8d0e_z.jpg

Post #11, Aug 28, 2010 10:49:43


Canon 5D | 24L | 50L | 85L | 135L
My Flickrexternal link
My webpageexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
cinemafia
Senior Member
cinemafia's Avatar
Joined May 2010
160 posts
Los Angeles, CA
[MORE/SHARE]

I ended up selling mine because I didn't like how long the MFD was, bought a 20mm f2.8 USM instead (which has half the MFD).

Post #12, Aug 31, 2010 15:36:43 as a reply to niwooe's post 3 days earlier.


1D MkII / 20:2.8 / 24-105L / 50:1.4
portfolioexternal link / flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
photobitz
PlatinumMeasurebaiter
photobitz's Avatar
Joined Jan 2006
6,499 posts
Wollongong, NSW, Australia
[MORE/SHARE]

cinemafia wrote in post #10824654external link
I ended up selling mine because I didn't like how long the MFD was, bought a 20mm f2.8 USM instead (which has half the MFD).

Yeah, the 20/2.8USM is so underrated. I don't think it has the great colour reproduction that the 20-35 seems to have though.

Post #13, Sep 06, 2010 00:22:18


Dan

My gear | Me on Flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
cinemafia
Senior Member
cinemafia's Avatar
Joined May 2010
160 posts
Los Angeles, CA
[MORE/SHARE]

photobitz wrote in post #10857227external link
Yeah, the 20/2.8USM is so underrated. I don't think it has the great colour reproduction that the 20-35 seems to have though.

I dunno, so far I can't really tell the difference. Heck, even if I could, I'd still stick with the 20mm USM.

Post #14, Sep 06, 2010 22:48:27


1D MkII / 20:2.8 / 24-105L / 50:1.4
portfolioexternal link / flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
niwooe
Senior Member
Joined Oct 2009
362 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

the MFD of this lens may be long but it's one heck of a lens!

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4138/4934604251_05627779d9_z.jpg

Post #15, Sep 07, 2010 12:00:09


Canon 5D | 24L | 50L | 85L | 135L
My Flickrexternal link
My webpageexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
27,133 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon EF 20-35mm f/2.8L
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00081 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
854 guests, 724 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is Alex3uerfuer

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.