Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 27 Dec 2012 (Thursday) 10:51
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Worst/cheapest lens Canon makes?

 
Merlin ­ Driver
Goldmember
1,020 posts
Likes: 21
Joined May 2005
Location: Maypearl, Texas
     
Jan 15, 2013 21:54 |  #61

EF 100-400L....




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
e.pie
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
685 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
     
Jan 15, 2013 22:29 |  #62

Merlin Driver wrote in post #15494230 (external link)
EF 100-400L....

Because that's cheap...


5DmkIII | 17-40mm f/4L | 24-105mm f/4L IS | Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 non-OS w/2x telecon | 35mm f/2 | 40mm f/2.8 | 50mm f/1.8 | 100mm f/2 | ЮПИТЕР-37A |24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 | 580ex | 2x 550ex | bunch of other miscellaneous filters and stuff :p
fullerfotos.net (external link) or click here for my flickr (external link) or here for my 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
outmywindow
Senior Member
Avatar
672 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jan 2013
     
Jan 30, 2013 08:38 |  #63

At f/8 on a tripod, the EF 75-300 III can actually work to get a reasonable photo, but at all other apertures and focal lengths, this is probably the worst lens from canon hands down. Soft focus galore, chromatic aberrations, slow focusing, and average build quality. It's almost advisable for someone who is interested in birding or distance telephoto shots who is a beginner to just save up the money for the 70-200 f/4L than waste money on this lens.


Just a soul with a camera

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
photobitz
PlatinumMeasure​baiter
Avatar
6,499 posts
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Wollongong, NSW, Australia
     
Feb 07, 2013 02:43 |  #64

e.pie wrote in post #15494354 (external link)
Because that's cheap...

LOL :lol:

I couldn't live without my 100-400L. Sure it's no prime but it still takes an excellent image. I have gripes with the barrel extension and manual focus mechanism but I wouldn't trash it over that. Not unless they drop the 600L/f4 to a similar price!


Dan

My gear | Me on Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
farmer1957
Senior Member
Avatar
901 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 60
Joined Jul 2012
Location: nevada
     
Feb 07, 2013 04:58 as a reply to  @ photobitz's post |  #65

just bought a EF 70-210 usm canon lens,
should be here today.
farmer1957




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,531 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Aug 2008
     
Feb 07, 2013 05:34 |  #66

The worst lens I ever used was a cheap Canon 20-35mm 3.5-4.5. Absolutely horrible! The worst bang for the buck lens ever would be the expensive Canon 400mm f4 DO. I don't believe there is a lens where you get less for the dollar you pay.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RobDickinson
Goldmember
4,003 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 1041
Joined Apr 2010
Location: New Zealand
     
Feb 07, 2013 14:19 |  #67

nightcat I assume you have compared the 400/4 DO price to all the other 400/4 primes?


www.HeroWorkshops.com (external link) - www.rjd.co.nz (external link) - www.zarphag.com (external link)
Gear: A7r, 6D, Irix 15mmf2.4 , canon 16-35f4L, Canon 24mm TS-E f3.5 mk2, Sigma 50mm art, 70-200f2.8L, 400L. Lee filters, iOptron IPano, Emotimo TB3, Markins, Feisol, Novoflex, Sirui. etc.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
noisejammer
Goldmember
Avatar
1,053 posts
Likes: 5
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto ON
     
Feb 07, 2013 21:22 |  #68

nightcat wrote in post #15582149 (external link)
...The worst bang for the buck lens ever would be the expensive Canon 400mm f4 DO. I don't believe there is a lens where you get less for the dollar you pay.

Here we go again....

RobDickinson wrote in post #15583731 (external link)
nightcat I assume you have compared the 400/4 DO price to all the other 400/4 primes?

Rob, I think you meant to ask whether nightcat has compared every lens Canon ever made. :)


Several cameras and more glass than I will admit to.
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnjefferson
Hatchling
4 posts
Joined Feb 2013
     
Feb 09, 2013 11:48 as a reply to  @ post 15493397 |  #69

The 50 f/1.8? I have shot multiple covers and layouts for national men's magazines with that lens. Skills will always trump equipment. I could take a "bad" lens and probably get a better shot with it than a non pro using a 70-200 f/2.8 II. Having said that, my least favorite lenses I have used are for sure the original 75-300 and the 28-135. No idea how the 28-135 got as popular as it did with its zoom creep, barrel wobble and poor performance if not in the best light.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,531 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Aug 2008
     
Feb 09, 2013 13:44 |  #70

RobDickinson wrote in post #15583731 (external link)
nightcat I assume you have compared the 400/4 DO price to all the other 400/4 primes?

Well, I've compared it the the MUCH less expensive 400mm 5.6 in actual usage last summer. I've also compared posted images from various websites (including the Lens Sample Photo Archive from this site) of the 400mm f4 DO against not only Canon's 5.6 version, but the Canon 400mm 2.8 and a number of other 400mm lenses from various manufacturers. The results from my actual usage of the lens concurred exactly with the results I see on various websites... the image quality of the DO does not match that of the other 400mm lenses. Most reviews of the DO are less than enthusiastic as well. At 5.6, the Canon 400mm 5.6 was sharper and had more pop than the DO at 5.6, and the DO costs 4 or 5 times as much. That is why I stated this lens is a terrible bang for the buck lens. There may be those who love the DO and feel it's a bargain at $5900.00, and that's fine. I just feel that a $6000 lens should have better IQ than a lens that costs $1300.00 at comparable f stops.

I read recently that Canon plans to release another 400mm f4 lens this year. I will be very interested if I can afford it. My guess is that the cost of the new one will be less that the present price of the DO. It certainly should be a better performer.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

12,516 views & 0 likes for this thread
Worst/cheapest lens Canon makes?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Evans7up
989 guests, 223 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.