Canon / Sigma / Tamron Walk-around lense

[jann1033]

i feel the need to mention this even though i think the 28-135 is no longer being considered...

i took my "fixed" copy out yesterday to shoot,first time i really have used it since i got it back. and i don't know what canon did to it but it now rivals my old sigma as the worse lens i have ever used. The is is working fine, no more problem with the not focusing or whatever was causing it to not take shots but now it is so soft it is unusable...i don't know if it is still not focusing correctly or what but now it also has blue and red shadowing around strong contrast places( maybe chromation..don't believe i have ever seen that so don't know for sure)it never had before. so i don't know if the factory specs they set it to are horrendous or what but i got rid of it and am just buying my 70-200f4 and being done with it.

so my feelings about this lens is if you get a "bad" copy ie not set to factory specs, it's good but if it's the way canon intends it it is awful...it kind of bums me out as it is forcing me to buy another wider lens now instead of later unless i just use the kit lens for anything below 50( can use my 50 1.8 also for that range)

 

[0bli0]

i generally carry several lenses, but my walk-around lens is usually the 24-70 2.8L. i'll usually carry the 50 1.4 for low light, a lensbaby, and then one or more of the following, depending on what else i'm shooting on that trip: 135 2.0L, 12-24 EX, 85mm 1.8, and/or the 15mm fisheye. i never bring anything longer than 135 to the parks
on my one of my trips last year - to Hong Kong Disneyland, the 24-70 was the only lens i had with me and i was completely happy with the results.

off topic: Jan - i'd definitely send it back with some example photos and a description of your experience. even though i don't use it on my body, my dw has very good shot IQ with her 28-135 and the IS is great to compensate for her heavy shutterfinger movement. it's also proving to work very well for my daughter's useage as she's learning.

 

[jann1033]

i generally carry several lenses, but my walk-around lens is usually the 24-70 2.8L. i'll usually carry the 50 1.4 for low light, a lensbaby, and then one or more of the following, depending on what else i'm shooting on that trip: 135 2.0L, 12-24 EX, 85mm 1.8, and/or the 15mm fisheye. i never bring anything longer than 135 to the parks
on my one of my trips last year - to Hong Kong Disneyland, the 24-70 was the only lens i had with me and i was completely happy with the results.

off topic: Jan - i'd definitely send it back with some example photos and a description of your experience. even though i don't use it on my body, my dw has very good shot IQ with her 28-135 and the IS is great to compensate for her heavy shutterfinger movement. it's also proving to work very well for my daughter's useage as she's learning.

yeah, i don't get it as i was happy with the shots before the motherboard and IS died. i'd had enough shipping it back and forth so i just traded it in and they are going to give me trade in $$ for the 70-200f4 lens...it looks perfect and now "works" perfect just takes horrendously soft photos . i think you can get a good or bad copy cause i'd looked up a bunch of reviews and they seemed split down the middle...now if the new lens is bad as well...well let's say it must not be the lens but the nut holding the camera that's the problem

 

[BorisMD]

i generally carry several lenses, but my walk-around lens is usually the 24-70 2.8L. i'll usually carry the 50 1.4 for low light, a lensbaby, and then one or more of the following, depending on what else i'm shooting on that trip: 135 2.0L, 12-24 EX, 85mm 1.8, and/or the 15mm fisheye.

The lensbaby?! I've seen this advertised. How do you like this? Could you post some examples of what you've done with it?

Thanks,

Boris

 

[handicap18]

i generally carry several lenses, but my walk-around lens is usually the 24-70 2.8L. i'll usually carry the 50 1.4 for low light, a lensbaby, and then one or more of the following, depending on what else i'm shooting on that trip: 135 2.0L, 12-24 EX, 85mm 1.8, and/or the 15mm fisheye. i never bring anything longer than 135 to the parks
on my one of my trips last year - to Hong Kong Disneyland, the 24-70 was the only lens i had with me and i was completely happy with the results.

Awesome DL HK pics 0bli0. I really enjoyed viewing them. Its nice to see some of the other parks every now and then. Thanks for sharing.

 

[MassJester]

Has anyone used the Canon 24-105/4 IS?

 

[Master Mason]

Has anyone used the Canon 24-105/4 IS?

Bob said above that it is his most used lens

 

[boBQuincy]

Has anyone used the Canon 24-105/4 IS?

I have had mine for about a year now, and use it more than any other lens (which is a lot). Canon has had some trouble making them right, my 1st one went back (not sharp) and the 2nd one was sent in for repair twice (it is very good now but I still feel it should be a little sharper).

The lens is larger than I expected and fairly heavy, with a 30D it is right at 3 lbs. It also uses battery power more quickly than a non IS lens (one battery usually does not last me all day anymore).

What other lens would I use? Maybe a 24-70 but that doesn't have IS and it really works well so the 24-105 is going to stay on my camera.

 

[0bli0]

The lensbaby?! I've seen this advertised. How do you like this? Could you post some examples of what you've done with it?

i love it. i have both a 2.0 and now a 3g.

here are some from the 2.0 with no processing other than mono conversion in the first two:

and here is one with the 3g (has lockable and finely adjustable focus)

 

[0bli0]

Awesome DL HK pics 0bli0. I really enjoyed viewing them. Its nice to see some of the other parks every now and then. Thanks for sharing.

no worries and thank you very much. btw you can see other parks by going up to the main Disney page

 

[BorisMD]

Oblio,

Those lensbaby photos are fantastic. I was looking through your galleries on your .mac pages, and am curious, are all of the f/2.8 pictures taken with the lensbaby or with one of the other primes?

Conversely, are you just shooting most photos at the wider aperture to get the shallower depth of field?

Also, I looked at the lensbaby website. I must say, I'm getting obsessed with it.

Regards,

Boris

 

[0bli0]

Boris,

thank you very much!
the lensbaby is a completely manual lens so it does not provide any EXIF data. so the aperture and focal length doesn't show up on the lensbaby photos. most all of the images on my pages taken @ f/2.8 are taken using the 24-70 2.8L

to answer the second part of your question - i shoot wider apertures when i want the shallow depth of field. this is usually when i'm closer to an object or if i'm taking a photo of a person. sometimes i'll stop down a bit, depending on what i want to have in the depth of field, to compose accordingly.

on the lensbaby 2.0 i generally tend to use the 4.0 aperture ring. it can be very difficult to find the sweetspot without a focussing screen using the f/2.0 ring. it's much easier on the lensbaby 3g since you can make small changes easily.