Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
Photography Canon L Lens Thread, L-coholics Anonymous
|
TSianho
|
Oct 13 2009, 12:04 AM
|
Cucimangkoklife
|
QUOTE(Vincent Pang @ Oct 12 2009, 05:41 PM) i'm struggling 17-40 or tokina 11-16 f2.8 17-40 is not wide enough, but will be nice if i upgrade to FF 11-16 is gonna be useful if i get 7D  U know u want the FF lar. Dont deprive urself.  QUOTE(yrh0413 @ Oct 12 2009, 08:35 PM)  yeap gonna let go my 40D once I got hold of my 7D; but it might not be so soon. 1740L as compared with Tammy 1750; basically you are paying a premium for weather-seal, USM, and higher built quality. IQ wise, I would say the tammy performs as good as the 1740L at f/4 (or perhaps even better).  I owned a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 before. IMO it's nowhere near the 17-40L. I don't notice any softness even wide open on my 5D2. I know it will be sharper when stopped down but I'm really happy with it at f4. Wait later I post up a full crop at 17mm n see. Just sorted out my internet so now can post pics again. Past 2 weeks no broadband damn charm. This post has been edited by ianho: Oct 13 2009, 12:06 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
DecaPix
|
Oct 13 2009, 08:50 AM
|
|
you mean narrow band? in malaysia we have broadband?
|
|
|
|
|
|
PCHo
|
Oct 13 2009, 03:49 PM
|
|
Pardon me, but is there a UWA "L" lens?
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSianho
|
Oct 13 2009, 03:54 PM
|
Cucimangkoklife
|
QUOTE(PCHo @ Oct 13 2009, 03:49 PM) Pardon me, but is there a UWA "L" lens? Got. 14mm I think. Need to go check my Canon Bible afterwards.  16-35 f2.8 n 17-40 f4 is also UWA mar. But for FF lor. This post has been edited by ianho: Oct 13 2009, 03:56 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
PCHo
|
Oct 13 2009, 03:59 PM
|
|
QUOTE(ianho @ Oct 13 2009, 03:54 PM) Got. 14mm I think. Need to go check my Canon Bible afterwards.  16-35 f2.8 n 17-40 f4 is also UWA mar. But for FF lor.  hahaha....bro ian, I m not on FF la. 16 & 17 is too long for my 40D la.... FF widest can go is 12mm?
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSianho
|
Oct 13 2009, 04:04 PM
|
Cucimangkoklife
|
QUOTE(PCHo @ Oct 13 2009, 03:59 PM) hahaha....bro ian, I m not on FF la. 16 & 17 is too long for my 40D la.... FF widest can go is 12mm? It's a 14mm prime IINM. Need to check bible afterwards. Even fisheye is 15mm oni.
|
|
|
|
|
|
yrh0413
|
Oct 13 2009, 05:05 PM
|
|
yup, bro ian is right. The widest L is 14mm f/2.8 L FF widest should be 12mm on the Sigma 12-24. You can go wider on Fisheye... google 8mm Peleng
|
|
|
|
|
|
ae8za
|
Oct 13 2009, 05:07 PM
|
|
QUOTE(PCHo @ Oct 13 2009, 03:59 PM) hahaha....bro ian, I m not on FF la. 16 & 17 is too long for my 40D la.... FF widest can go is 12mm? 12mm if you go for Sigma 12-24mm for Canon FF body...  Else for Canon L, it's the 14mm II. Tested the lense few times but I notice that my Canon 15mm Fisheye is slighly wider (because of the distortion)...  p.s Aiyaa, yrh0413 beats me for the answer... This post has been edited by ae8za: Oct 13 2009, 05:08 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
creap
|
Oct 13 2009, 06:23 PM
|
|
QUOTE(yrh0413 @ Oct 12 2009, 08:35 PM)  yeap gonna let go my 40D once I got hold of my 7D; but it might not be so soon. 1740L as compared with Tammy 1750; basically you are paying a premium for weather-seal, USM, and higher built quality. IQ wise, I would say the tammy performs as good as the 1740L at f/4 (or perhaps even better).  After seeing the price for 7D, still think the same? lol I guess if I'm less nit-picky, the tamron's IQ would be enough to satisfy me =/ IQ aside, L will never be the wrong choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
yrh0413
|
Oct 13 2009, 08:12 PM
|
|
 7D was out since 2 weeks back in Singapore... quite a number of CS forumers got their hands on their 7D. Price is S$2.4k for body alone (RM5800). Well, still waiting for proper reviews from DP
|
|
|
|
|
|
marcweizer
|
Nov 20 2009, 03:01 PM
|
New Member
|
QUOTE(yrh0413 @ Oct 13 2009, 08:12 PM)  7D was out since 2 weeks back in Singapore... quite a number of CS forumers got their hands on their 7D. Price is S$2.4k for body alone (RM5800). Well, still waiting for proper reviews from DP  Good news is that DP reviewed 7D and has confirmed that it's one of the best camera ever produced. Price is around RM5.6k for the body only... Was hoping it was a FF... then again, if it is, Canon will be shooting themselves at the leg
|
|
|
|
|
|
lan76
|
Nov 20 2009, 04:03 PM
|
|
If want a FF body, go for 5D Mark II but if want to shoot sport with 1.6 crop factor, 7D is the perfect choice compare to 1D Mark III ( 1D mark III however is much more better, prize also better  )
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMspiration
|
Nov 22 2009, 12:00 PM
|
Getting Started

|
Iish, guys. My hands went gatal after reading through this whole thread. Gosh.  Which lense do you guys recommend, as my first L lens? I currently have 450D, kitlens, 50/1.8, 430EX II. I'll be shooting events, gatherings.. things like that. Kena poision tim This post has been edited by IMspiration: Nov 22 2009, 12:19 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSianho
|
Nov 22 2009, 01:05 PM
|
Cucimangkoklife
|
QUOTE(IMspiration @ Nov 22 2009, 12:00 PM) Iish, guys. My hands went gatal after reading through this whole thread. Gosh.  Which lense do you guys recommend, as my first L lens? I currently have 450D, kitlens, 50/1.8, 430EX II. I'll be shooting events, gatherings.. things like that. Kena poision tim  Most ppl buy 17-40 f4L or 70-200 f4L as their 1st L lens coz both r the cheapest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
yrh0413
|
Nov 22 2009, 02:45 PM
|
|
 the newer 100mm f/2.8 macro L IS USM also quite cheap eh
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSianho
|
Nov 22 2009, 02:48 PM
|
Cucimangkoklife
|
QUOTE(yrh0413 @ Nov 22 2009, 02:45 PM)  the newer 100mm f/2.8 macro L IS USM also quite cheap eh Oh ya. Forgot about that. But newcomers wont be looking for a prime or macro.
|
|
|
|
|
|
yrh0413
|
Nov 22 2009, 02:55 PM
|
|
well that's the cheapest f/2.8 and it comes with 4-stops IS!  serious contender for a beginner's first L
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMspiration
|
Nov 22 2009, 03:12 PM
|
Getting Started

|
QUOTE(ianho @ Nov 22 2009, 01:05 PM) Most ppl buy 17-40 f4L or 70-200 f4L as their 1st L lens coz both r the cheapest. iish. but the 17-40 ain't enough for me, perhaps. 70-200 is a better choice, but is it worth it to get f/2.8L IS?
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSianho
|
Nov 22 2009, 03:22 PM
|
Cucimangkoklife
|
QUOTE(IMspiration @ Nov 22 2009, 03:12 PM) iish. but the 17-40 ain't enough for me, perhaps. 70-200 is a better choice, but is it worth it to get f/2.8L IS? Hehe, 70-200 f2.8L IS is the favorite lens in my bag. The 17-40 is the other favorite as it's a fantastic UWA for me.
|
|
|
|
|