Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/02/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Brian Reid wrote: >> What are your impressions of the following lenses? >>> Canon EF 24-70mm L f2.8 USM >>> >>> Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM >>> >>> Canon EF 16-35mm f2.8L USM > > I have all of those lenses. I'm not much of an ultrawide guy, so I > use the 16-35 only for architectural interior shots, and I get it off > the camera as fast as I can. The 70-200 is a great lens, but it's > tremendously heavy and increases the weight of an already heavy > camera. The IS works, but you wouldn't need it if the camera weighed > less. > > If I'm shooting people with the Canon, I put the 85/1.2L on it and > stop thinking about the lens. It's a lens of the same quality as a > Summilux 75 ASPH but it requires that I lug around a giant Canon > DSLR. If I'm shooting anything else, or if I'm just carrying the > camera around in case I need to shoot something, I put the 24-70/2.8L > on it. These are all good points. I've got all 3 lenses and I probably use the 16-35 a bit more just because I do like the occasional wide point of view or I need it in close quarters; the 70-200 is wonderful but very heavy and not in the least bit inconspicuous (its probably drawn more comments from bystanders than any lens I've owned); and the 24-70 is a very nice medium zoom which I use for general purpose shooting and in particular snaps of the dogs and the dog people in the house. I do however wish you people would quit saying all these nice things about the 85 1.2. I don't have that one yet... ;-) --Bob