Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 30, 2004, 11:41 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

The lens arrived and I am happy with the quality. I could not take any outside shots we were in the middle of thunderstorms. We only average about 8 and 1/2 inches of rain here in El Paso, TX. Would you know we would have heavy rain on the day I wanted to take photos with my L lens. I took some shots indoors of wife's ceramic collection and they were great. Hopefully I can post some pics after this weekend. I am headed to Cloudcroft NM. Hope to catch some of the color change. Cloudcroft sets at 9000 feet. Going to play golf and shoot some photos.
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2004, 4:02 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

I was able to take a few pictures at lunch. What I noticed if I was to close to an object, I could not get the lens to autofocus. If I back away then everything worked fine. I have the distance switch set to the lowest settings. Is this normal.



Phil
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2004, 4:09 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
geoffs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,025
Default

Mealers wrote:
Quote:
My 70-200 f/4'L' arrived today and i've just got back from taking a few test shots and i'm shocked by just how good it is! I know everyone rants about just how good 'L' glass is and i was sceptical to how much better it was to my Sigma EX HSM APO lens. For me, the Canon wins hands down, and l'll be saving for my next 'L' lens.
Mealers, could you quantify this for those of us who haven't yet got L glass? I'd love to see some comparison shots of pictures from your new lens versus your Sigma lens. Where is it better in the image? etc, etc...
geoffs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2004, 4:10 PM   #24
Zal
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 78
Default

How close were you?

I took a quick look at the specs on B&H's site, and the minimum focus distance is listed at 3.9 feet. So, if you were closer than 4 feet, I would expect the lens not to be able to focus.
Zal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2004, 5:50 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

Zal

I looked at the specs and I think you are on the money. Now to decide on the 17-40L or the 24-70 L.
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2004, 8:42 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

I posted some sample photos at www.pbase.com/gibsonpd3620 I will post better shots when I return from the mountains. The colors are on the nose. The three bums are my best friends. They don't eat much and they don't complain.
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2004, 11:47 PM   #27
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 6
Default

gibsonpd3620 wrote:
Quote:
Zal

I looked at the specs and I think you are on the money. Now to decide on the 17-40L or the 24-70 L.
I was in the same boat as you. I have the kit lens, 50 1.8 and the 70-200 4L. I was going back and forth between the 17-40 4, the 17-35 2.8, the 28-70 2.8, and the 24-70 2.8.

I just bought the 24-70 2.8L today and I hope it's going to be just the thing. :-):-)

gfather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2004, 7:27 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

gfather

I will wait for your's to come in and provide us with some examples. All the examples I have seen so far are outstanding. Does the gfather stand grandfather?
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2004, 1:28 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

gibsonpd3620 wrote:
Quote:
Zal

I looked at the specs and I think you are on the money. Now to decide on the 17-40L or the 24-70 L.
I finally caved in & ordered the 17-40L yesterday. Should be here in a week and I will post the results.


bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2004, 3:36 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
Mealers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 169
Default

geoffs wrote:
Quote:
Mealers wrote:
Quote:
My 70-200 f/4'L' arrived today and i've just got back from taking a few test shots and i'm shocked by just how good it is! I know everyone rants about just how good 'L' glass is and i was sceptical to how much better it was to my Sigma EX HSM APO lens. For me, the Canon wins hands down, and l'll be saving for my next 'L' lens.
Mealers, could you quantify this for those of us who haven't yet got L glass? I'd love to see some comparison shots of pictures from your new lens versus your Sigma lens. Where is it better in the image? etc, etc...
geoffs,
One thing i have noticed is that the Sigma tends to soften at minimum and maximum focal distances. Saying that, if i wasnt happy with it i would of traded it in.
The Canons quality is in the sharpness, it kinda jumps out at ya more.
In a way i hate to jump on the band wagon and praise 'L' glass up even more. Its alot of money for an amateur to stump up, but i guess ive been lucky in that i've managed to sell a few pictures to the guys down the beach and i've been saving my pennys.
Weather permitting i should be able to get out tommorrow and take a few shots. l'll start a new thread with a comparison of the 2 lenses so you can make your own mind up.

Mealers
Mealers is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:20 PM.