> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Cotty > Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 12:30 PM > To: EOS list > Subject: Re: [inbox] Re: EOS Super-Wide's > > > On 2/2/05, Chip Louie, discombobulated, unleashed: > > >I've both used the Sigma 14mm 2.8 and Canon EF 14 2.8L. The > Sigma's flare > >is slightly more an issue than with the EF 14 2.8L but at this > F/L flare is > >likely to be an issue a lot of the time. As far as image > quality goes the > >Canon EF 14 2.8L is noticeably sharper with better contrast when > shooting on > >chrome films. I have not had a chance to compare the two on my EOS 1D or > >1Ds bodies as I own neither lens at the moment. > > Nice one Chip. I'd love to have the Canon, and I dare say one day I'll > come across one at the right time, at the right price. I'm in two minds > about selling the Sigma - I originally bought it because it was a great > grab lens on the D60, but it's just a bit too wide for the 1D for > the street. > > I'm considering the EF 20mm (I like the discipline a prime gives for this > kind of thing, so a wide zoom is not an option for me) but having had a > couple of L lenses, I'm now spoilt and wary of plastic.... > > Any comments on the 20 mil? > > > > > Cheers, > Cotty >
Hi Coty, Personally I like primes. Back in the day (30+ years ago), I used to have only primes because they were the only way to get high quality lenses. But back then I only shot people and field sports so this was easy to do with 50mm, 85mm, 105mm, 200mm and 300mm lenses. If I could I'd own primes for everything but I need too wide a range of focal lengths to be able to afford the all of the fast primes and the idea of carrying them all is not very appealing to me without a sherpa and two more spare bodies. I shoot with OS 1D and EOS 1Ds bodies so I have the usual Canon 2.8L zoom triplets (EF 16-35 2.8L, EF 28-70 2.8L, EF 70-200 2.8L IS), and selected Canon primes (EF 15 2.8, EF 20 2.8USM, EF 50 1.4USM, EF 100 2USM, EF 300 2.8L, EF 1.4X, EF 2XII), that suit my work (architecture, products, motorsports), and what I don't own I rent at Samy's Camera. The EF 14 2.8L would make a poor lens for street shooting, it's too wide, too heavy too fragile. The EF 14 2.8L is good for architecture though and outdoor shots are great with the EF 14 2.8L I would buy one but I'm not sure I would use it enough to justify the cost. It's a very good if not a great lens though if used with care. I have owned a couple of EF 20 2.8USM lenses and they were both pretty good lenses on my film and digital bodies. I had an EF 20-35 3.5-4.5USM for many years which was as sharp a WA zoom as there was at the time (as good IMO as the EF 20-35 2.8L with less distortion), had very low distortion even for a prime. The EF 20 2.8USM has even lower distortion and is very sharp when stopped down to f/5.6-f/11 with minimal flare. But the EF 20 2.8USM's sharpness will suffer if you stop it down past f/16 but you should not need to given the DOF that a 20mm lens has. I like mine and use it regularly on the EOS 1Ds for landscapes and recently for stitched panos that I'm trying to perfect. Cheers/Chip * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
