Which L zoom brought you great joy?

Which L zoom(s) brought you great joy?


Results are only viewable after voting.

when nikon managed to release a few units of d800 in usa, canon reduced 5d3 by 300 in canada. but there are not enough d800 in sg now. so i am hoping that when nikon resolve the supply issues, canon will reduce their price further
 

based on my experience with Tamron's Ultrasonic Silent Drive(USD), it is noticeably slower than Canon's USM.

but it is still fast enough for most purposes.
 

when nikon managed to release a few units of d800 in usa, canon reduced 5d3 by 300 in canada. but there are not enough d800 in sg now. so i am hoping that when nikon resolve the supply issues, canon will reduce their price further

Oic, good luck!
 

avsquare said:
I'll still consider abit.. the extra 35mm is very useful, but I do miss the f/2.8 at night. I may be tempted to sacrifice the 35mm for the f/2.8 plus VC and the better performance compared to 24-105L :)

Bro, have you bought your new toy? I mean Tamron 24-70 VC. Do not ask me to sponsor ah.
 

Mine seems to be the 70-300 is usm l..got it not long ago..i use it to take photos of my sis ice skating..it's not super fast..but it's good enough for quick focusing....next would be my 100mm l macro lens..love macro
 

Last Sunday, after much reading, I bought 70-200 F2.8 II IS after comparing it with 85mm F1.2L. 85mm F1.2L definitely has very nice creamy bokeh at F1.2 to F1.8. The 85mm is $700 more and limited use. 70-200 can serve as portrait, landscape ( like highlight a house across a lake) and taking my kids on stage or ride. So I decided to get the 70-200.

After playing around inside and outside my house for a day, I am very impress with it. It is definitely sharper and focus faster than 17-40 and 24-105. Of course it is really heavy and the white color is too loud.

then I load up Reikan Focal to do micro adjustment. No adjustment required! both wide and tele set to zero. That is amazing.

I did not vote for the 70-200mm F2.8 II IS L USM as I do not own it when I did my voting. Now I cannot vote again. if not, I will definitely vote for 70-200 F2.8 II IS.
 

Last Sunday, after much reading, I bought 70-200 F2.8 II IS after comparing it with 85mm F1.2L. 85mm F1.2L definitely has very nice creamy bokeh at F1.2 to F1.8. The 85mm is $700 more and limited use. 70-200 can serve as portrait, landscape ( like highlight a house across a lake) and taking my kids on stage or ride. So I decided to get the 70-200.

After playing around inside and outside my house for a day, I am very impress with it. It is definitely sharper and focus faster than 17-40 and 24-105. Of course it is really heavy and the white color is too loud.

then I load up Reikan Focal to do micro adjustment. No adjustment required! both wide and tele set to zero. That is amazing.

I did not vote for the 70-200mm F2.8 II IS L USM as I do not own it when I did my voting. Now I cannot vote again. if not, I will definitely vote for 70-200 F2.8 II IS.

I would say it's the sharpest zoom as of now.. we'll need to see if the 24-70L II can challenge this telezoom or not. :bsmilie:
 

I would say it's the sharpest zoom as of now.. we'll need to see if the 24-70L II can challenge this telezoom or not. :bsmilie:

Actually I am more eager to how much better is 24-70L II to replace 24-105 F4 L as my travel lens. 24-105 is lighter ( even 24-70II is lighter than I by 150g), smaller and has IS. In travel and family events/outing, in to 24 to 80 range, I normally take group photo with the background frequently as well. So normally I shoot F5.6 to F8. With IS, I do not have to push up the ISO so much. Sadly Canon does not put IS onto 24-70 II despite Tamron has done it recently on its 24-70.
 

Able to add in Canon EF 24 70 f2.8 L USM II? :)
See if it catch up...
 

Last Sunday, after much reading, I bought 70-200 F2.8 II IS after comparing it with 85mm F1.2L. 85mm F1.2L definitely has very nice creamy bokeh at F1.2 to F1.8. The 85mm is $700 more and limited use. 70-200 can serve as portrait, landscape ( like highlight a house across a lake) and taking my kids on stage or ride. So I decided to get the 70-200.

After playing around inside and outside my house for a day, I am very impress with it. It is definitely sharper and focus faster than 17-40 and 24-105. Of course it is really heavy and the white color is too loud.

then I load up Reikan Focal to do micro adjustment. No adjustment required! both wide and tele set to zero. That is amazing.

I did not vote for the 70-200mm F2.8 II IS L USM as I do not own it when I did my voting. Now I cannot vote again. if not, I will definitely vote for 70-200 F2.8 II IS.

Hi, I agree with you. I own the 70-200 f2.8 II IS L USM. Fantastic lens. I think I might as well lug it along for travel too...
See how it pit against the other two favourites.
Canon 70-200mm Big Battle (f/2.8, f/2.8 II & f/4) - YouTube
 

It is so sharp I had to lower clarity...shot at f2.8, and the bokeh is just great, like a very good prime.
488214_4032053953004_39823402_n.jpg
 

Last edited:
Rumours of a 24-70 2.8 IS.

What would be a possible (not 16-400 f/1.0) dream zoom lens that you want Canon to make?

I will start with a

1. 14-24 f/2.8
2. 24-105 f/2.0 with Hybrid IS and built in dual 1.4x and 2.0x Type III teleconverters with lens no bigger than a pancake.
3.
4.
5. .....
 

1. 14-24 f/2.8
2. 24-105 f/2.0 with Hybrid IS and built in dual 1.4x and 2.0x Type III teleconverters with lens no bigger than a pancake.
3.
4.
5. .....

Ha ha, good one! :bsmilie:
 

I would say the new Canon 24-70 II. The 70-200 f2.8 IS II gets some minus points for its weight and general bulkiness :D
 

Back
Top