Canon 18 135 Is Reviews

Saturday, October 17, 2009 - 17 Posts by 13 People

Receives very good reviews, and is $439 vs $2,000 for the 1.2 L. So you’re getting probably 80 ? Like rent them for a weekend? The focal length of the 135 can be more comfortable for the "model If money wouldn't be (big) problem what would you choose and why: 135F2 or 85/F1.2 MII. Right now I have: 7D 17-40/F4 70-...

Wednesday, April 22, 2009 - 19 Posts by 8 People

reviews as well.Okay, so I'm getting that the Canon 1.4 would not be a big step up from my 1.8. many reviews about all the 50mm lens's for Canon before I settled on the 1.8. The Sigma has Self explanatory title, which of these two lenses would be better for shooting portraiture.

Tuesday, September 29, 2009 - 15 Posts by 9 People

Expensive but the reviews talk great things about it saying it almost compare to the Canon 1.2L. Well being an ex-owner of the Canon EF 50mm f1.4 I can tell I was not very happy with that lens. My you're going with a shorter prime, I'd suggest the Sigma 30 1.4 over the Canon 28 1.8. I owned both

Monday, October 12, 2009 - 16 Posts by 16 People

canon 70-200mm F4 IS or 70-200mm F2.8 IS? Is there such a big difference? Does the extra weight the reviews you’ll find the 4 L IS has the best reviews of any of them, and in fact has image check the reviews you’ll find the 4 L IS has the best reviews of any of them, and in fact has image

Thursday, November 12, 2009 - 25 Posts by 12 People

I was going to buy a backup camera system and decided to do it with Nikon instead of canon. I'm Canon line? I want to match or come close to these lenses. Thanks, Steve Current Body: Canon 5D Current which they were, sorry). Canon L Zooms: Canon 16-35 f/2.8L - Nikon 17-35 F2.8D - IIRC, reviews

Monday, October 19, 2009 - 29 Posts by 23 People

From canon, and personally I hope there is either a new 100-400 f4 is, 200-400 is or a 24-70 f2.8 since the "conclusion" of some reviews is based on price-performance ratio.I bought a 135 2.8 SF 18... . But it does make me wish that all reviews listed the price of the lens at the time of the review. Especially...

Saturday, March 14, 2009 - 19 Posts by 8 People

OK, I have spent probably more than 7 hours reading reviews and comparing these wide angle primes f/1.4-L. But some mixed reviews on front focus issues. Any info? That's just a quick summary of info The 35/2 does not have cmoparable sharpness to the 35/1.4. Here's a site I like to use: canon lens

Thursday, September 10, 2009 - 33 Posts by 17 People

But have been following up the canon 20D and related cameras since. Now, i have finally planned to shift to canon 7D. Question : - Which lenses (by canon or other companies) would fit in my budget . No perhaps about it from the reviews I've seen. The f/4 IS 70-200L is from every chart I've seen

Friday, September 11, 2009 - 99 Posts by 72 People

F2.8 USM IS - this one would be great for Canon EOS 7D users, complementing the 17-55mm f2.8 USM DO came out (see bottom of this article): http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/400-do length. EF-s or FF, don't care. Just to show "you can, Canon". (e.g. EF-s 70-135 f/2 IS, 50-100 f/2

Friday, November 06, 2009 - 16 Posts by 13 People

F1.4 rather than 1.8. But is it worth it? Like to shoot portrait, landscaping, sports etc Thanks came out with a new 100mm f/2.8 Macro lens, which is probably what you're thinking of. The reviews with as much DOF as possible from 1.4->2.8. After reviews of how much better the vignetting