Thanks! And yah, i'm loving my 5d. Damn though, did full frame start showing up the limits of my poor 28-105 USM II and 70-300mm USM III lenses.
Recently picked up Tokina's 28-70mm f/2.8 lens since, in spite of having rented and fallen in love with them, canon's 24-70mm f/2.8L is not in the cards for me in the near future. I have to say - it does a damn good job of coming -really- close to the L lens. It's got a bit more vignetting (though nowhere near the USM II/III lenses I have) and it is slower on the focus in low light.
Have i mentioned I love having real 28mm? I still want to play with a 16-35mm lens on this thing.
(Alas, not in the near future, need to take the camera in to be cleaned, there's a nice giant blotch of dust on the sensor - and i'm a bit wary of going in there and cleaning it myself at the moment)
Also - should mention that the Tokina's build quality is also really nice. I haven't played with tamron as a 3rd party yet and sigma lenses that i've tried have felt cheap so far. So - I don't know if you're looking for a low cost route to L lenses (I am until I start pulling in enough income from the photography to pay for it : ) - the Tokina's seem to be pretty damn good.
(That and Tokina's optics are made by hoya - whose filters I've been a fan of)
Yeah the full frame / resolution is certainly demanding on the lenses. I forgot - didn't you have that 50mm prime or were you just talking about possibly getting that? I bet that would make for some really sharp images. I'm thinking of getting the USM version... mainly for it's 1.4 aperture.. I've been really into shallow dof lately. Mmmm... :)
That Tokina does look pretty decent. I have somewhat of the same feelings about Tokina and Tamron that you do about Sigma, but just because the few lenses I've been exposed to by them were pretty cruddy. I think they all make lenses ranging from crappy to great. Even Canon.
I think it depends on the specific lenses really though. Some companies have really gotten some lenses perfected while some of their others even in the same price range just don't hold up. I've got two sigmas (the 17-35 and the 105mm 2.8 Macro - both EX series) and they've both been great to me. As I've said before, the 17-35mm is not the sharpest but I've gotten many great shots with it regardless. The 105mm is SUPER sharp. It's a great lens (except the autofocus mechanism is a joke and mostly useless. Haha)
Don't be afraid of the cleaning!!! Just get the Eclipse fluid and the Type 3 Sensor Swabs. It used to be a lot scarier when people had to craft their own devices for this but with these things it's really easy and quick. I have been using them for quite a while and have not had any problems.
Is the 17-35mm the 2.8 or the 2.8-4? (I hate ebay - trying to find that sigma lens I keep hitting the 2.8-4s when I want the 2.8 across teh board).
Also - a blower took care of my sensor problems - all's well and no 2day-week period sans camera.
I think for my next two lenses I want to get a good macro lens and a good long zoom (the 75-300mm USM III lens is ... ugly on the 5d. I can't decide if I want a f/2.8 for long (which seems to limit me to up to about 200mm in zoom) or longer range (tokina makes an 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
focalintent) wrote2006-03-15 08:49 pm
no subject
I love the Wood1 shot. Really cool.
no subject
Recently picked up Tokina's 28-70mm f/2.8 lens since, in spite of having rented and fallen in love with them, canon's 24-70mm f/2.8L is not in the cards for me in the near future. I have to say - it does a damn good job of coming -really- close to the L lens. It's got a bit more vignetting (though nowhere near the USM II/III lenses I have) and it is slower on the focus in low light.
Have i mentioned I love having real 28mm? I still want to play with a 16-35mm lens on this thing.
(Alas, not in the near future, need to take the camera in to be cleaned, there's a nice giant blotch of dust on the sensor - and i'm a bit wary of going in there and cleaning it myself at the moment)
no subject
(That and Tokina's optics are made by hoya - whose filters I've been a fan of)
no subject
That Tokina does look pretty decent. I have somewhat of the same feelings about Tokina and Tamron that you do about Sigma, but just because the few lenses I've been exposed to by them were pretty cruddy. I think they all make lenses ranging from crappy to great. Even Canon.
I think it depends on the specific lenses really though. Some companies have really gotten some lenses perfected while some of their others even in the same price range just don't hold up. I've got two sigmas (the 17-35 and the 105mm 2.8 Macro - both EX series) and they've both been great to me. As I've said before, the 17-35mm is not the sharpest but I've gotten many great shots with it regardless. The 105mm is SUPER sharp. It's a great lens (except the autofocus mechanism is a joke and mostly useless. Haha)
Don't be afraid of the cleaning!!! Just get the Eclipse fluid and the Type 3 Sensor Swabs. It used to be a lot scarier when people had to craft their own devices for this but with these things it's really easy and quick. I have been using them for quite a while and have not had any problems.
no subject
Also - a blower took care of my sensor problems - all's well and no 2day-week period sans camera.
I think for my next two lenses I want to get a good macro lens and a good long zoom (the 75-300mm USM III lens is ... ugly on the 5d. I can't decide if I want a f/2.8 for long (which seems to limit me to up to about 200mm in zoom) or longer range (tokina makes an 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6).