Canon lenses, universally disliked?

Discussion in 'Canon' started by RichA, Jul 31, 2008.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    This is a post on another group, pretty funny and sad at the same
    time.

    Hi, This is my very first post here.
    I'm using Canon 5D, and am looking for a long telephoto lens.
    I'd like to know what would be the best alternate lens for the focal
    length of 180mm to 200mm.
    I prefer prime, and I do not want Canon Lens.
    Finally, i can pay up up $800.
     
    RichA, Jul 31, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    Scott W Guest

    They think 180-200mm is a "long" telephoto lens?
    The only non-Canon lens I have bought in the last 10 years was a
    Sigma, to get it even close to sharp I had to shoot at f/10. I am
    sticking with Canon lenses.

    Canon lenses are not all that consistent, but when you get a good one
    it works well.

    BTW if he really wants a good lens he (or she) might look at Fred
    Miranda's site.
    <http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?
    product=37&sort=7&cat=2&page=1>


    Scott
     
    Scott W, Jul 31, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    : This is a post on another group, pretty funny and sad at the same
    : time.
    :
    : Hi, This is my very first post here.
    : I'm using Canon 5D, and am looking for a long telephoto lens.
    : I'd like to know what would be the best alternate lens for the focal
    : length of 180mm to 200mm.
    : I prefer prime, and I do not want Canon Lens.
    : Finally, i can pay up up $800.

    You've got something there, Rich. I'll step outside while you clean it up.
     
    Robert Coe, Jul 31, 2008
    #3
  4. RichA

    Paul Furman Guest

    Sounds like they're wanting to compare the Canon 200/2.8 to the Nikon
    180/2.8

    :)

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Jul 31, 2008
    #4
  5. RichA

    Richard Guest

    They think 180-200mm is a "long" telephoto lens?
    The only non-Canon lens I have bought in the last 10 years was a
    Sigma, to get it even close to sharp I had to shoot at f/10. I am
    sticking with Canon lenses.

    Something about "two wrongs" springs to mind...
     
    Richard, Jul 31, 2008
    #5
  6. RichA

    Ray Fischer Guest


    _____________________
    /| /| | |
    ||__|| | Do not feed the |
    / O O\__ | trolls. Thank you. |
    / \ | --Mgt. |
    / \ \|_____________________|
    / _ \ \ ||
    / |\____\ \ ||
    / | | | |\____/ ||
    / \|_|_|/ | _||
    / / \ |____| ||
    / | | | --|
    | | | |____ --|
    * _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
    *-- _--\ _ \ | ||
    / _ \\ | / `
    * / \_ /- | | |
    * ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
     
    Ray Fischer, Jul 31, 2008
    #6
  7. RichA

    HEMI-Powered Guest

    RichA added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...
    I have no need personally for long lenses but I'm curious as to
    why you don't like Canon glass or why you claim that they are
    "universally disliked". I have two shorter Canon L-glass zooms
    that are prices and large/heavy but they are also superb lenses.
    All camera makers have some baddies but the majors manufactuer
    excellent lenses, as witnessed by the many purchased by happy
    customers. If, OTOH, you have a limited budget, perhaps you
    should look for what I have found to be a quality brand, Sigma,
    or maybe a Tamron which I've heard is also a good lens.
     
    HEMI-Powered, Jul 31, 2008
    #7
  8. Hey, Jerry, long time.

    Don't know if your question is rhetorical, or baiting.
    Rich love to post anything at all negative, esp. re Canon or P+Ses.
     
    John McWilliams, Jul 31, 2008
    #8
  9. RichA

    D-Mac Guest

    There's an interesting exercise to be done here.
    For example:
    The 17 - 85 IS Canon is probably best known for it's chromatic
    abberations, barrel distortion and image stabiliser. It sells for about
    half the price of a 24 - 70 F/2.8 sans stabiliser and produces some
    real shocking images at times.

    OK so DxO Optic Pro (stand alone Raw and Jpeg converter) has a module
    for most Canon DSLRs and the 17 - 85 lens. Cost? $169 for the standard
    version.

    What does it do?
    Curiously it is one of the best inventions of this century for
    photographers. Any camera lens combination there is a module for can
    have "L" series quality images from basically crap lenses, and not just
    Canon on canon. There is a whole raft of modules for Tamron Sigma etc
    lenses. If you're serious about image quality, this is the product to use.

    develop the raw file with DxO and then edit it with DPP, Lightroom or
    whatever and no one but you will ever know you saved $500 when you
    bought a lens because the images will look just as good!

    So for the OP:
    Sigma EX DG Mk II 80 - 200 F/2.8 is a near "prime quality" zoom lens
    with the focus speed and accuracy of it's Canon rival. There are DxO
    modules for both the Canon and the Sigma lenses. Once again half the
    cost of the Canon and at least equal performance. With DxO the image
    quality looks more like it came from a Carl Zeiss lens than from a Sigma.

    No IS means a monopod or tripod is pretty much essential at long lengths
    but it's a small price to pay for a $1400 saving! Personally I gave up
    coke and coffee and got stability.
     
    D-Mac, Jul 31, 2008
    #9
  10. RichA

    Richard Guest

    P&S's and Canon do so much wrong, you could post forever.
     
    Richard, Aug 1, 2008
    #10
  11. RichA

    Richard Guest

    There is a limit to what those programs can do. For instance, once CA is so
    bad it bleeds into the subject, killing contrast in the process (instead of
    being just on the edge) it's game over.
     
    Richard, Aug 1, 2008
    #11
  12. RichA

    Richard Guest

    Why? The post was factual, the guy owns a Canon body, he doesn't want a
    Canon lens. This makes him much like a lot of 5D owners I've run across.
    BTW, do you really (in your fantasy world) believe you "manage" this group?
     
    Richard, Aug 1, 2008
    #12
  13. RichA

    D-Mac Guest

    Manage it? Hell man, he owns it! ...In his dreams.
     
    D-Mac, Aug 1, 2008
    #13
  14. RichA

    D-Mac Guest

    I agree but when you use one of these lenses you should reduce the
    contrast in the functions menu to pre-empt that happening. There are
    some instances however where a pencil and sketch pad would be a better
    choice!
     
    D-Mac, Aug 1, 2008
    #14
  15. RichA

    HEMI-Powered Guest

    John McWilliams added these comments in the current discussion
    du jour ...
    Neither. I long ago learned that absolute praise or condemnation
    of anything is always wrong so when somebody says that
    "manufactuer X lenses are 'universally disliked'" I feel inclined
    to ask why they believe that. Come on now, while not all Canon or
    Nikon or Minolta or ... lenses aren't great, they're also not all
    crap.
     
    HEMI-Powered, Aug 1, 2008
    #15
  16. RichA

    Bates Guest

    Yup - there it is folks time to wrap up the debate. Rich has managed
    to once again prove his point flawlessly. ONE person has written a
    comment on some group saying they do not want a Canon lens and
    thus......Canon lenses are "Universally Disliked".
     
    Bates, Aug 1, 2008
    #16
  17. RichA

    jmeehan Guest

    That certainly does not indicate a universal dislike, nor does it
    even mean that the writer, assuming it was not a troll to start with,
    does not like all Canon lenses.

    When are you going to grow up and get over this Canon thing of
    yours.
     
    jmeehan, Aug 1, 2008
    #17
  18. RichA

    RichA Guest

    I don't like Canon lenses, I don't like their bodies. I like their
    sensors.

    Canon lenses (primarily wide angles)are disliked by many except those
    who don't care about ultimate quality, which seems a shame since Canon
    sensors deserve really good lenses.
     
    RichA, Aug 1, 2008
    #18
  19. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Actions speak louder in some cases, the armies of 5D owners who buy
    non-Canon lenses in a quest for image quality is proof of what I
    maintain. Part of the reason so many old primes command such high
    prices is because of these Canon buyers.
     
    RichA, Aug 1, 2008
    #19
  20. I happen to be a professional photographer who likes canon. When I used to
    shoot in film I had an Eos Elan IIe and had four lenses. When I moved over
    to digital I stayed with Canon so I could use those lenses without having to
    buy new ones. I've never had any problems or complaints and the pictures
    turn out great. So universally disliked is disproved.
     
    Jack Ruby Tuesday the Fourth Esq., Aug 1, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.