Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
I suppose a 16-400 f2.8 L USM IS is hoping a bit....even if I had won the lottery. ![]()
Quote: There were some glitches with early models of the 5D, which have now been fixed
What glitches?.
Quote: If Canon ever bring out a 28-135 (or thereabouts) L lens, I could be tempted!
I believe the 24-105 is the result CB.
I like the 5d but it is the cost of supporting lenses that puts me off. I worked out that even with the current cash backs it will cost me nearly £3,500 to get 5D and L glass to the same range of focal length coverage. lenses
17-40L
24-105L
100-400L
1.4x TC
I could restrict myself to the 1st two lenses for the 5D and keep my 300D plus 55-200 and 170-500 for wildlife/sports, but theny why bother upgrading. I know I am moaning ![]()
Quote: I believe the 24-105 is the result CB.
Not an entirely satisfactory result. It is not as good at 24mm as the 17-40L is at 17mm!
I would rather have a less ambitious wide end and a longer top end. Even a 35-135 or 35-150 would be fine (given I already have the 17-40) and would, hopefully, achieve more consistent quality throughout the range.
The 24-70L is too heavy, too expensive and too limited in range. Also, if one listens to the whiners on DPR and Fred Miranda
the QC on the 24-70L is questionable, with many having to be repeatedly returned for replacement.
So far as I am concerned there isn't a totally satisfactory mid-range zoom for FF digi at the moment. I'm happy enough to wait until one comes out! ![]()
I have had mine for about 2 weeks (bought just before the rebate but was £20 less than with the rebate (kit with 24-105) as whe put their prices up by £150 when the £130 rebate started!!!
It replaced my 10D and is streets ahead. I think that compared to some of the later models the differences wouldn't be as great. My main issue with the 10D was the lack of a good Canon 17-85 lens to fit it. I needed to upgrade body and lens to get the lens coverage I wanted and this bought the price differential closer (until I decided to get the 24-105 as well but at £1950 it was such a bargan I couldn't resist especially as I don't have to pay for a year!!).
cheers
Al.
Quote: The 24-70L is too heavy, too expensive and too limited in range. Also, if one listens to the whiners on DPR and Fred Miranda the QC on the 24-70L is questionable, with many having to be repeatedly returned for replacement
Sorry, but DPR and FM must talk complete bollocks. The 24-70L is unquestionably the dogs gonads of lenses.
And if it's too heavy, you're a wimp.
John, I have the following for my 5D:
17-40L
24-70L
70-200L (F4
)
100-400L
100 macro
50mm f1.8
(all the other lenses stay in the museum now)
Was it expensive ? Well, my I sold my third child for medical experimentation.......
![]()
Go on, buy one.
Quote: I'm still waiting for a reply CB?.
Sorry - you'll have to ask those on here who had to return their 5D's in the early days after launch. Certainly 2 or 3 on here (Abwhitt springs to mind... can't remember the others).
And a horde of others on DPR......needless to say! ;-D
Quote: The 24-70L is unquestionably the dogs gonads of lenses
Well, it can just about match a 50mm/f1.4 - but only just. And I already have that in my collection! ![]()
Oh and it weighs more than the bloody 5D !
No thanks - you can keep the 24-70L. My lightweight - and two stops faster - prime does it for me! ![]()
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.















