1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Well, it’s better than I thought..

Discussion in 'Lens Matters' started by pixelpuffin, Jul 3, 2021.

  1. spinno

    spinno Well-Known Member

    Imagine being the instigator of a new cult...Picasso might have had cubic balls but you've double the amount of balls...
     
  2. pixelpuffin

    pixelpuffin Well-Known Member

    64DD36E2-D6C5-4A7A-8D62-51FEF2731277.jpeg 7E3F28A7-ECFA-419F-9037-A6B6BE815095.jpeg 10EF52AB-A0CD-4BF3-BE68-774ED9296BDA.jpeg After the surprise of the humble 22-55, I decided to take a punt on the 80-200 4.5-5.6ii £30 plus £6 for the OEM ET-54 hood
    Taken this morning at 5am as I was getting ready to go to work. Hanging basket.
    Wide open, JPEG’s, straight from the camera with no editing…
     
  3. Benchmark

    Benchmark Well-Known Member

    They are remarkably good for any lens. In my experience most kit lenses are perfectly good, but we prefer to have something 'reassuringly expensive' on the front just to make sure. I also wonder f there is greater variability in the performance of kit lenses?

    My brother bought the Zuiko 12 - 40 Pro lens for his OM-D EM5 MkII on my recommendation. Now that is a good lens, but after comparing the results of identical images taken with his kit lens he took it back for a refund. I am very happy with my own 12 - 40 Pro but then I prefer the extra stop or two of light.
     
    peterba likes this.
  4. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    It's an incredibly compact, very cheap lens that's ideal for this sort of thing - shooting wide open, where sharpness isn't really that important. It's fairly slow and rather noisy in focusing, has pretty poor bokeh once you start to stop down, and really isn't all that sharp. But for all that, I've still got one (paid £40 for mine 20 years ago or so), and sometimes still use it in preference to much more expensive lenses, because (a) it's not noticeable in the camera bag in terms of size and weight, and (b) you can take advantage of its characteristics, as you have done so nicely here. You don't always need the best lenses to get the shots you want.
     
    peterba and Benchmark like this.
  5. pixelpuffin

    pixelpuffin Well-Known Member

    I’m on a roll with these old discarded EF lenses. I’ve just purchased the EF 28-70 3.5-4.5ii
    The irony is that I had this very lens back in the early 90’s. It was permanently attached to my canon EOS 600…. I say permanent as it was the only lens I had back then. But the combo got me a A in A level photography. Like a fool I sold it
    I’m now intrigued to see what this old optic can deliver with my trusty 5d3.
    I’m having a lot of fun trying out these old lenses.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2021
    zx9r and peterba like this.
  6. zx9r

    zx9r Well-Known Member

    If you ever find an EF80-200 f/2.8 L for peanuts buy it, the AF is as slow as a very slow thing but optically it is spot on and sooooooo nice wide open.
     
  7. pixelpuffin

    pixelpuffin Well-Known Member

    It’s on my radar :)
     
  8. pixelpuffin

    pixelpuffin Well-Known Member

    Well I couldn’t help myself
    Recently got the 50-200L
    Oh my…..,,,,
     
    zx9r likes this.
  9. pixelpuffin

    pixelpuffin Well-Known Member

    562E817F-F472-455C-9316-BB4B2F50472E.jpeg 14AF2A4B-023F-445F-A4D3-2FEE963C5081.jpeg And best of all….it’s Black! Yay


    Also managed to score a mint boxed 135mm 2.8 SF. It really is mint, looks like it just came out of the factory. Wow
    The biggest surprise was the quietness of the Arc- Drive focus. Not buzzy at all, nothing like as noisy as other Arc lenses I have. And it is extremely compact. Turn the SF off and it’s a nice fast sharp compact 135/2.8. The EF 28/2.8 hood fits perfectly. I sometimes pair both the 28 & 135 together and share the hood.
    If I pair the 80d and 6d together I have theoretically 28, 45, 135 & 216mm. same card and battery usage plus both are WiFi enabled to sync with phone. It works well as the camera layouts are pretty much identical.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2021
    zx9r likes this.
  10. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    I used the SF lens for many years - it stayed in the Canon line-up until fairly recently. Nice lightweight lens, and as you say, pretty sharp with SF turned off. If it wasn't for the brilliance of the 135mm f2 L, I'm sure it would have been a lot more popular.
     
  11. pixelpuffin

    pixelpuffin Well-Known Member

    I’ve got the 135/2 and tbh I’m not that impressed, it’s neither here nor there
    Big and bulky but only 135mm, much prefer using the 200/2.8ii

    besides, I’m beginning to get tired of this bokeh fanaticism. I’ve recently started shooting at 5.6 mostly as most pictures wide open could have been shot anywhere!! There’s nothing to tell a story, as the background just becomes a mottled backdrop if that makes sense?

    At first I thought it was great, but not so much now.
     

Share This Page