| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/05/2003 03:10:05 PM · #1 |
Please share your opinions on lenses for Canon cameras. I have an old Canon 35-80mm and a Quantaray 70-300mm and a friend told me that I'd see a major improvement in the image quality (not the composition) if I upgraded to Canon's L series lenses. Are these lenses really worth the money? Do you notice better colors, crisper images, better contrast with L series lenses?
Thanks for your input,
Kevin
|
|
|
|
08/05/2003 03:46:30 PM · #2 |
| I have two L lenses, 17-40/4 and 70-200/2.8 IS. Of course they are sharper and over all better but ýou must decide if you want to spend so much extra money. I also have 28-135/3,5-5,6 IS, 75-300/4-5,6 IS and 100/2,8 USM Macro. The 17-40mm is a rather cheap lens for being a L lens and really worth the money. The 70-200mm lens is THE telezoom lens. It´s SO good but a little too big and heavy. This tele lens is not cheap. Therefor I think the 75-300mm is a good alternative. I have bought lenses with IS (stabilizer) because I mostly don´t use a tripod. I think the IS lenses are absolutely worth the extra money. |
|
|
|
08/05/2003 03:51:16 PM · #3 |
| The 70-200F4L is a good option if the 70-200 F2.8 L IS is a bit too big/ heavy/ expensive. |
|
|
|
08/05/2003 03:52:18 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
The 70-200F4L is a good option if the 70-200 F2.8 L IS is a bit too big/ heavy/ expensive. |
Of course! |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/13/2025 02:34:39 AM EDT.
