Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/02/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 >From: Philippe Orlent <philippe.orlent@pandora.be> >Subject: [Leica] not entirely OT: the recurrent dilemma >I'll go the Canon 5D route, and I have almost decided on lenses, too. >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 > >And, if you'd only keep one lens on your analog M, which one would >that be? > >Other -and wise(r)- suggestions? >Thanks, >Philippe ............................................................................... This isn't a suggestion, but more of an account of my experience. I'm sure I'm part of a very small minority (of one?) with my preferences. FWIW: I use Canon 1D, 1D MkII, and 1Ds at work. The 70-200mm f2.8 IS lens is my favorite. It is sharp wide open, and has that stabilizer, although I use it on a monopod 90% of the time. It must be tough, too. I slipped on a wet patch in a building lobby, and this lens, mounted on a 1D and monopod, slammed down onto the floor. I was sure it would need repair, but it tested out as good as ever. I think the lens hood took most of the force. My second favorite lens is the 85mm f1.8, third is the 50mm f1.8. We have the 28-70mm f2.8L lens and the 16-35mm f2.8L. These don't satisfy me as much as the 70-200. I always counted on being able to use Leica, Nikon, or even my Olympus lenses wide open, but when I try that with these Canon wide zooms, I get soft images, especially off center. Even stopped down to 4.5 or 5.6 they don't give the crispness I want. To be fair, maybe it's my technique. I have never been comfortable with autofocus, even with the film Canons, and the screens are not anywhere near as suitable for manual focusing as the ones in Nikon F2's and F3's for example, so I have to rely on AF. Maybe these cameras sense that I'm an RF kind of guy. I think I've gotten a greater percentage of out-of-focus pictures since our lab went to AF cameras. Before this I thought nothing of shooting at f/2, and got great results with those prime lenses and bright screens, or with my Leicas. Strangely, since I like fast lenses, I seem to have gotten pleasing results with our bargain lens, the 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS. It's sometimes slow to focus, but at the tele settings even the wide-open f5.6 aperture seemed to give better results than I'd expected. Partly because I have to haul these big lenses and bodies around all week, I look forward to getting away from them on my time, so getting rid of M equipment is foreign to me. It's just such a pleasure to pick up an M or other small camera. I know the 5D is smaller than the 1D, etc. but it still is large compared to an M or OM-2. If I were ever to go digital, I'd probably would want to save money and bulk by getting just prime lenses. Long winded Alan Alan Magayne-Roshak Senior Photographer Photo Services Univ. of Wis.- Milwaukee Information & Media Technologies amr3@uwm.edu http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Alan+Magayne-Roshak/