Reality check please

[btaylor]

Thanks guys I was leaning toward the 10-22mm so that might have put it in the bag for me. The 70-200mm 2.8 IS will be top of the list next purchase though I think. Might have to wait until March next year when my next bonus comes through(provided the mining industry kicks back into gear) as I am trying to spend "excess" cash and not savings on this wonderful little hobby.


Thanks again for the advice, I shall order the 10-22mm directly. (Found one for AUD$935 which is at least $100 cheaper than anywhere else)

[Victor Pelino]

My walk around lens is my 24-105. Its the best lens for general/all purpose stuff and if you're choosing middle ground between the two things you like to do this is the lens. However, I have to say, you probably shouldn't settle for the middle ground if you're looking for a lens for these specific reasons. With that in mind I would probably cut the 24-70 out too. (FOR NOW! Its a great lens) So really that leaves you with the 10-22 and the 70-200. The 70-200 2.8 is probably my favorite zoom lens. I use if for everything. I live in rugged West Virginia in the U.S. and I've also traveled to every kind of environment our National Park system has to offer. (Swamps, Deserts, Mountains, Oceanic) and my 70-200 has taken a licking and keeps on clicking. So far she's had no dust or mechanical breakdowns. Plus you get a 2.8. thru out the focal length range. Add an extender and you've got a nifty extra macro on your side. I guess if I had my choice between an "L" series and any other lens I'm going to side with the "L" most every time. And for the last reason, the "s" series are nice but if you ever decided to upgrade you're going to want to sell it off. If dust is a problem where you live it's going to cut your resell value. Of course, no matter what you decide they're Canon. So you'll be happy with whatever you decide. Good luck.

[btaylor]

Well I just went down to my local shop and purchased the 10-22mm. (Quick I know!) I've only played around with it about the house but I'm stoked with the amount you can capture in the frame! I'll get a nice sunset shot out at Lake Moondarra out of town tonight and post it up for you all.


Cheers!

[Bill M.]

Btaylor: Wow, you do act fast! Congrats on your new lens! I think you'll love the new perspective it gives you...looking forward to some pics from it...


Benjamin: No offense taken...You are right in that there are other qualities to lenses that would make them superior to one another besides just sharpness. A very extreme example would be with the50 1.8and the50 1.2. There are plenty of people I'm sure who may think the 50 1.8 might be as sharp as the 1.2 but then you would have to take into account the extra stops, contrast, bokeh, construction, etc... that you would be getting with the 1.2 (again, extreme example similar to the price difference between those two lenses!) that would make it the superior lens.


For me choosing the 24-105 versus the 24-70 wasn't just about sharpness, I was willing to sacrifice the extra stop for the extra 35mm and the IS.I have found that the 24-70 does perform slightly better at 24mm than the 24-105, there is certainly more vignetting, but I can easily PP that out. In the end, it is a personal preference for one over the other, and what you need out of the lens. Like you said, they are both great lenses.


BTW, I had the 70-200 f4 before getting the 70-200 f4 IS, and don't think the lens is any sharper than the latter, both are very sharp. With that said--I'm thinking about getting the 2.8 IS anyway![]

[Benjamin]

With that said--I'm thinking about getting the 2.8 IS anyway![img]/emoticons/emotion-5.gif[/img]
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Another interesting story of me is that I actually bought the 70-200/2.8L IS before taking it back to exchange for my current 70-200/4L IS. The f2.8 is a GREAT lens to me; the only problem (sadly) i found personally is that i feel hard to carry it around all day. I cannot even hold it for too long without several short breaks in the middle. I know this has something to do with my 1V-HS - it by no means is a light camera, add the f2.8 lens the weight is reaching my limit for comfort/easy handholdability and carry around convenience (size is another issue). I tried the f2.8 on my old Rebel XTi, the overall weight works out fine - because the XTi merely weighs a pound, and the 1V-HS fully loaded with battery and film weighs nearly 3 pounds - that feels so different in a real hand.


I always recommend the 24-105L to people who's looking for a walk around lens with satisfactory IQ. In that regard there isn't a better option that I can think of. I think people who got the 24-70L are paying for what they have to have, like the f2.8. Bryan said in his review that the 24-105L will be the one if he could only have one lens - I agree and I'll do the same if that's the case[]


BTW, since you have the 70-200/4L IS, would you please to check if you can hear a rather big click sound when you shake the lens by hand. Because now I can hear a noisy click sound inside my lens when I'm shaking it. I know it's common to have a click sound in every lens, but just not sure if mine is the correct sound it should be making. The lens functions perfectly fine and I don't recall any abuse from my part, so i'm not too worried.


Thanks a lot!


Ben

[Bill M.]

That is funny Ben about the 2.8, I've used it on several occasions and have enjoyed it. I originally was swayed to the f4 IS because of the lighter weight but then I got used to carrying around my 100-400, so the 2.8 won't really bother me much. I'm used to having a batt grip attached to my 20D or 5D II so the weights are pretty similar to lugging around a 1D series. I think it balances out a lens like the 100-400 or 2.8 IS more evenly, even though the overall weight is greater.


I tried shaking my f4 IS and I never really noticed the click sound before (then again, I've never really shook my lens like that before!). I noticed a much more pronounced sound when I shook the lens in a vertical position and not so much in a horizontal position. Why that would be, I'm not sure. Is it because the IS unit's stabilizers move a little less in the horizontal position? I doubt it though...


Hey if ain't broke...


Bill

[Benjamin]

Bill,


I was commented before on my limited physical ability of carrying heay stuff - that's why I haven't come to own any lens that weighs more than 1kg. But you're totally correct, a heavy lens like the 70-200/2.8L IS will balance the weight of the camera more evenly, and you'll be even more correct to own the 70-200/2.8L IS as long as you don't feel it's too much of a burden to you - because it's optically magnificent.


I'm not sure about the exact reason why lenses click when being shaked. I notice the click sound on almost all lenses that I have ever shaked, they're different from each other. I think that certainly has something to do with its moving parts inside, like the focusing lens group, and indeed, the IS. My 70-200/4L IS has a slightly more pronounced sound when shaking horizontally. I think I'll go to a local shop today to shake their 70-200/4L ISs see what they sound like (hopefully i won't be kicked out because of doing that on their lenses[]). My lens may sound louder than others, but as long as the lens works fine, I won't take any action.


Benjamin

[btaylor]

As promised here is pretty much the first shot to come out of the 10-22mm. So far it's behaving well and I'm extremely happy with the new options is has introduced into my photography.


40D, 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 @ 10mm, F/14. 7 images merged to HDR in photomatix. Enjoy


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.34/3603248758_5F00_b450e71983_5F00_b.jpg[/img]

[ShutterbugJohan]

I like the picture, Ben! The HDR is cool. :-) Is this near your home?

[btaylor]

I like the picture, Ben! The HDR is cool. :-) Is this near your home?
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

Yes Johan it's about 15 km's from my home. Normally it's completely dry however we had a really big wet season so everywhere is flooded (As is most of North West Queensland, Australia). It's quite sad in some instances as a lot of the cattle farmers have lost their cattle and most of their infrastructure so it's going to be a long time to rebuild their businesses back up.


Cheers.