• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Canon 20-35 mm Lens - any comments on Quality?

J

Jeff O'Neil

New member
Hi Folks,

Looking to add a relatively inexpensive wide angle to my kit. Will be used on the 1DMKII and a 5D.

I'm looking at the Canon 20-35 as a contender. Having for tried the lens I should explain that I'm looking for wide with a hint of fisheye. Not really sure if this is the right lens or not or if that combo is available at all.

Hopefully someone has some experience with it or can recommend another lens.

Thanks!

Jeff
 
D

Don Lashier

New member
Hi Jeff,

Which 20-35, the newer 3.5/4.5 USM or older 2.8?

I've not used either but researched a number of years ago and iirc the 2.8 has a pretty good reputation but lacks USM. The reports on the newer (and cheaper) one seem mixed.

Is something like a 17-40 or used 16/17-35 out of your budget?

- DL
 
J

Jeff O'Neil

New member
Hi Don,

It's the newer model. I had read some nice reviews of the older 2.8 as well.

I hadn't thought about a used 17-40(35). That might be a good route to go.

I'm looking for a lens that I won't use that often but need for certain scenarios when used tight to the subject it almost has a fisheye feel to it. I may be totally off base making that assumption but that's what I'm looking for.

I'll check out ebay etc and see what the used lenses are going for.

Thanks!

Jeff




Don Lashier said:
Hi Jeff,

Which 20-35, the newer 3.5/4.5 USM or older 2.8?

I've not used either but researched a number of years ago and iirc the 2.8 has a pretty good reputation but lacks USM. The reports on the newer (and cheaper) one seem mixed.

Is something like a 17-40 or used 16/17-35 out of your budget?

- DL
Click to expand...
 
K

Kathy Rappaport

pro member
I have it

And I hardly use it. I bought it when I bought my 20d. Used it some on that camera then I got the 24-70 and put it away. I took some great portraits with it and some travel stuff.

Maybe I will take it out for a spin and see what it'll do for me on the 5d. I like the weight and the color too. I'd be willing to part with it for the right price since it's barely been used
 
J

Jeff O'Neil

New member
Thanks Kathy,

I think I'm going to head off to my local shop and test a few lenses.

Since I won't need that width very often I'm considering just renting when I think the need arises.

Jeff
 
Will Thompson

Will Thompson

Well Known Member
Hi Jeff, Take a look at the Sigma Super Wide Angle 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX Aspherical DG HSM Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS at B&H.

302698.jpg


I normally do not recommend after market lenses but this one has won awards and several friends of mine have it and like it.
 
C

Christen Hansen

New member
Canon 20-35 2,8 L,

Hi Jeff
From the old film days, I still have my Canon 20-35, 2,8L (with USM). If you can get your hands on such one, do it. It is the best wide zoom I have ever had.
good luck
Christen Hansen.
 
J

Jeff O'Neil

New member
I'd love to find an older 20-35L but they don't come up for sale that often!

The Sigma is enticing. I have a friend who uses his a lot.

Here in Canada the dollar parity is making it very difficult to justify the Canadian retail pricing. As an example the Sigma 12-24 is $1149.00 at my usual shop, the same lens at B&H is aprox 723.00 Canadian.

I always try to shop local but it's no longer something I can justify.

I'll keep sniffing for used or Ebay.

Thanks everyone!

Jeff
 
nicolas claris

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Hi jeff

The 12-24 is a jewel and I use it a lot in and outdoor (I sold my Canon 17-40 which was good after having bought the Sigma).

But you better test it before putting it in your bag.

They are not all equal, the out of factory quality testing of Sigma is quite tolerant as far as I could see… (blurred corners)

With a FF camera, you better use it @ ƒ8 or even ƒ11 to avoid vignetting. Then it is really a good piece of glass.

At 24 mm I do prefer the Canon L 24-70. I use the 12-24 mostly between 12 and 15 mm…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top