Photography Shoutbox
- Thread starter Dinzdale40
- Start date
inspired1
High Society
I actually got rid of the XTI a while ago. I had two 40D's, which worked great, because I could mount the 17-55 to one and the 70-200 to the other. All the controls, the pictures, etc would be the same without having to swap lenses.
Jumped on the 7D when a good deal popped up on Craigslist. Currently trying to unload one of the 40D's that I have. So far the 7D is ridiculous! In a good way! Took a bunch of shots at ISO12800 today! It is almost like having night vision, haha. The video looks great, but I'm still learning in that regard. It's a pretty big step up from the 40D, IMO.
EDIT:
How do you like the 24-70? I went with the 17-55 and I love it, but I always wonder what I'm missing with the 24-70. You shoot on a crop body, right? I really don't think I could handle a 24mm wide end for normal work. It's just not wide enough for group shots or tight spaces. Plus I'm a huge fan of IS. Don't plan on buying any lenses without it! The 17-55 is probably my favorite lens, even over the 70-200 2.8 IS. It is REALLY useful in a lot of situation. It's tack sharp (way sharper than the 70-200) and focuses fast and accurately.
Only downside to the 17-55 is that it's built like crap, IMO. It's not terrible, but it's not L quality either. Feels about on par with the 17-85 or 28-135. Decently solid, but not built like a rock like the 24-70. Someday I might be tempted enough to try the 24-70, but for now I think I'm pretty set with the 17-55.
Jumped on the 7D when a good deal popped up on Craigslist. Currently trying to unload one of the 40D's that I have. So far the 7D is ridiculous! In a good way! Took a bunch of shots at ISO12800 today! It is almost like having night vision, haha. The video looks great, but I'm still learning in that regard. It's a pretty big step up from the 40D, IMO.
EDIT:
How do you like the 24-70? I went with the 17-55 and I love it, but I always wonder what I'm missing with the 24-70. You shoot on a crop body, right? I really don't think I could handle a 24mm wide end for normal work. It's just not wide enough for group shots or tight spaces. Plus I'm a huge fan of IS. Don't plan on buying any lenses without it! The 17-55 is probably my favorite lens, even over the 70-200 2.8 IS. It is REALLY useful in a lot of situation. It's tack sharp (way sharper than the 70-200) and focuses fast and accurately.
Only downside to the 17-55 is that it's built like crap, IMO. It's not terrible, but it's not L quality either. Feels about on par with the 17-85 or 28-135. Decently solid, but not built like a rock like the 24-70. Someday I might be tempted enough to try the 24-70, but for now I think I'm pretty set with the 17-55.
Last edited:
hiddengamer7
Well-Known Member
For full frame, the 24-70 is wayyy too useful not to have, even though I'm not the biggest fan of mine. My favorite lens is my 70-200 F/4 cause it is by far the sharpest thing I've ever seen.
hiddengamer7
Well-Known Member
Yea, Gilbert was saying the same thing, but I dont think that the new one will be good enough for people to switch from one to the other. If it is though, that means that the market will be good for me trying to get a 2.8
Yes, I have a 40D for sale on Craigslist. PM me with what you had in mind.
The new 70-200 2.8 IS should have the new IS, and if the last 70-200 they released was any indicator, it should be EXTREMELY sharp. The f/4 IS is probably Canon's sharpest zoom. The f/2.8 IS mkI is a bit soft on the long end. "Soft" being a relative term. It's "soft" for an "L" lens. Still very sharp in the whole scheme of things. Miles ahead of a consumer zoom.
The new 70-200 2.8 IS should have the new IS, and if the last 70-200 they released was any indicator, it should be EXTREMELY sharp. The f/4 IS is probably Canon's sharpest zoom. The f/2.8 IS mkI is a bit soft on the long end. "Soft" being a relative term. It's "soft" for an "L" lens. Still very sharp in the whole scheme of things. Miles ahead of a consumer zoom.
I know someone on CL selling a 17-85 IS lens for $250...good price? Think I'll pick it up maybe and then sell the 18-55 IS since the range is covered by it? Good trade-off for a .5 difference in max aperture (kit IS lens is f/3.5, this is f/4 I believe)?
