New lenses

Sep. 4th, 2009 05:43 pm
ewx: (Default)
[personal profile] ewx

Canon's new 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 lens looks interesting to me, and I'll be keen to see a proper review.

I've been using the 17-85mm f/4-5.6 for some time; its overwhelming plus point is the wide focal length range (compared to say the 18-55mm kit lens) and although I've been generally pleased with the results image quality starts to fall when it's wide open (especially when this means both focal length and aperture).

The first of the apparent advantages of the lens is 2mm more on the focal length. This amounts to about a 10% wider field of view (66° versus 73°) and since I keep running up against the 17mm stop, I'm sure I'd use the extra.

The second is another third of a stop in the diaphragm. Again doesn't sound like much but could just be enough on a dim day, and if it pushes the point where things get soft out a bit further that would help too.

It looks like it's physically shorter and fatter, but heavier, than the 17-85mm. The former is certainly good, as with a camera on the back and polarizer on the front the old lens is a tight fit in my camera bag. Fatter means that I'd need a new polarizer.

The obvious downside is the cost, even given that I expect I'll be able to sell my old lens on.

(Yes, I know perfectly well that if you really want high quality, fixed focal length is the way to go, but I have very limited tolerance for (1) carrying around lenses I'm only going to use occasionally and (2) constantly swapping between different lenses.)

In other news they've significantly upgraded their 100mm macro lens with IS and (given the L designation) presumably superior glass, not that I've detected any flaw in the existing one, which I've got a lot out of. I think this will be easier to resist but both of these lenses being announced at the same time has left me feeling like Canon have an eye on my wallet in particular l-)

(no subject)

Date: 2009-09-07 08:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] baljemmett.livejournal.com
It wasn't visible on Saturday night -- too much cloud cover -- but yesterday I took this one (cropped, at 1:1) (http://flatpack.microwavepizza.co.uk/scratch_pub/100-400/IMG_0681_c.jpg), handheld at 400mm. The tripod made no obvious difference! Bit rough-and-ready settings-wise I'm afraid :(

(no subject)

Date: 2009-09-12 12:53 pm (UTC)
ext_8103: (Default)
From: [identity profile] ewx.livejournal.com
Not bad.

November 2025

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
91011121314 15
1617 181920 2122
23242526272829
30      

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags