|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on February 11, 2018 Pros: Lightweight, economical, compact, image quality Cons: it is not stabilized Opinion: It simply makes good pictures. Sharp and colorful. The af works well. After years of use there is no dust between the internal lenses. Convenient because light and compact. On the vignette ff but it is clear enough already at full aperture. Good boken. Missing IS, for some perhaps a real limit. For me no. On all entry level 100 times better than 18-55 of the kit. |
 | sent on October 08, 2017 Pros: Weight, dimensions, optical quality. Silent and precise AF. Cons: Full-color chromatic aberration Opinion: Optics all do with in the focal range that is interesting from landscape to portrait. The quality of the image that is returned is very good, though not good. You have to understand why you are looking for it. I use 99% optical optics, but I needed to use them in the classic family situations where I was asked to do as a photographer. There! This optic is perfect for these situations, especially by linking weight-dimension-quality-color-cost. It may be used with a flash.rnDoted with a silent AF and with a sniper precision, at least on 6D, it forgets the few flaws it brings. rnDifficult to find in the market because I think a few would give it away at a low price (but more could not be asked) than the undeniable benefits it has. rnPutting out sharpness, the center is always sharp, less at the extremities of the wide openings. Even closing at f5.6 is clear even at the sides. It has a blur very soft, pleasing. Beautiful warm colors typical of the 90s usm series. The constructionand is not excellent, with the barrel divided into two parts when it stretches, and it cuts a bit. I have to say, however, that the specimen in my possession, despite having a few decades behind, does not have only granules of dust inside the interior. If you love the fixed but still need a zoom for rare occasions, and you think it's not worth looking for a L-style optics, this model could do it for you. Optical to use with Canon DPP for the necessary corrections (distortion and AC) |
 | sent on June 23, 2017 Pros: Compact, light, fast usm, crisp, warm colors canon Cons: Considering the age of the project and the results that it still manages to pull out, absolutely none Opinion: Long ago I asked my photo-shopkeeper to let me try a Canon Ef 24-70 f.2.8 The first series he had for sale, professional lens with interesting features (I had the 28-70 f2.8 L), but to the test it did not excite me so much that it sparked the spark to make the purchase. Especially because of the excessive weight (950 gr) as well as the excessive encumbrance of the same and the yield that has not fascinated me too much. When I tried this now economic goal I was stunned by the sharpness (especially at the center even the largest openings), the versatility of size and weight that one brings with it. The AF, true USM, is very fast and quite accurate, the warm colors of the Canon tradition that in the STM of our days we dream of them, good contrast to all focal lengths. Considering the double-cam construction is also true that the front lens has a bit of play, but nothing outrageous, having seen worse with the youngest and most expensive (at the time) 17-85 EFS IS and with 28-105 3.5 -4.5 II USM.The distortion at 24 mm is there but I've seen worse in much more expensive optics, also the loss of quality in the corners is not as exaggerated as I read in some reviews. Fully satisfied, I only wonder why optics of this kind are no longer in production. Highly recommended. |
 | sent on May 23, 2016 Pros: well-built, very light !!!, small size, good optical quality, fast and accurate autofocus USM Cons: sharpness to not exciting edges, chromatic aberration blue-green-purple at the edges pushed in against the light. Opinion: I bought this lens for reading outputs and "versatile", and to not have to wear out too the 24-105 L, more heavy and awkward to carry around, and subject to the infamous break of the inner cable after a certain number of you zoom. This little zoom has a purchase price of its content in the used market (my I won an auction on ebay for less than 100 euro), and an optical quality far from poor, I would say very good . Returns of beautiful colors, is very sharp in the center, the distortions are smaller than the 24-105. E 'versatile and light, while being sturdy in construction; starting from 24mm wide-angle does not regret too much more driven into the landscape outputs. A 70mm you can make some decent portrait. A handyman is worth every penny and does not regret too much more expensive lenses, heavy and bulky. |
  | sent on January 05, 2016 Pros: size, weight, price used, speed 'focus, quietness', good quality' general optics, almost a constant F4. Cons: not crystal clear wide open especially to the sides and edges, chromatic aberrations. Opinion: I replaced the 24-105 f4 L with this tiny lens handyman very economical. For those who do not need the strength, stability, and tropicalization of 105mm, this old (because 'no more' in production) replaces admirably heavy L series, which did not excel in any field. If I make a comparison, I find the most 24-85 'fast in Maf and even more' silent brother L in practice and 'really absent any noise. Its lightweight and compactness are two characteristics that now can not be found in any objective in circulation. I do not understand really why 'no manufacturer has a similar objective in the catalog. Missing stabilization but to use all-purpose, mainly diurnal, not if they miss. The overall sharpness and 'really good and once closed by at least one stop does not regret any goal. At full aperture and not 'a monster of sharpness especially at the edges, but nothing so horrible and unusable. Perhaps the 24-105 was higher at full aperture but once closed a little, fthe little bears and 'even a thread better. An obvious flaw are chromatic aberrations, always very present in the scenes with strong contrasts. Fortunately, using the program Canon DPP, miraculously disappear in a click, contributing greatly to give a 'picture more' clean. The brightness' and 'satisfactory as to almost 35mm and' still f3.5, then loses a bit 'in the side paintings where it comes to f4.5, but overall offers the same possibilities' control of the PDC of a constant f4 . In conclusion, for the price at which it is used, and 'a deal if you love the lightness and speed' focus before all else. Too bad they do not do more '. |
 | sent on May 14, 2015 Pros: Very compact, well built although plastic, fast autofocus, good zoom range, also suitable for full-frame cameras, good sharpness and resistance to flare. Cons: vignetting obvious, but easily corrected in post production; the absence of the stabilizer. Opinion: I bought this lens from Japan after taking a 6D used, paying about 160 € with expenses including customs of 32 €. For the price at which you can find it used the council for its compactness, its good optical performance and reliability USM autofocus. I replaced it with the "loser" Canon 24-70 f4 is usm l because I needed the stabilizer when I'm not going to bring the best of 17-85 treppiede.rnLeggermente is usm F4-5.6 as sharpness is also brighter .rnIn ultimately a good lens that can give beautiful soddisfazioni.rn |
 | sent on March 17, 2015 Pros: Price, focal range, also useful on FF. Cons: Lacks stabilization. I can not find fault. Opinion: Bought together with the 350D now 10 years ago has become the universal use in place of the 18-55 II. I never noticed the defects reported by others. Hardly wrong focus. Despite his years and the purchase of other optics, in fact continues to be the most used. So I pretty much always used. It 'true that I am not a good photographer, but ... |
 | sent on January 10, 2015 Pros: Price, focal range, compactness Cons: Not stabilized, the rest all right Opinion: I consider this lens more than a cheap compromise, in my view, very good image quality excellent size and the range of focal lengths. Do not use it very much, because I do mainly fauna, however, to use as a handyman in all situations (not when you need a wide angle fixed ...) I consider it a great optics, when compared to the alternatives on the market in the same price range. rnSi is only used, given the cost definitely not too heavy at the economic level your kit; recommended. |
 | sent on February 27, 2013 Pros: Lightweight but sturdy, economical, very reliable and fast. Cons: I personally think that for what it costs not have any particular defects. Opinion: I have this view from 11 years, I bought it for my EOS 33V Film and since then I have not dumped. Only recently, through the FF, I could replace it with the 24-105 but I have to admit that in some ways has nothing to invidare his older brother, cartoon less than 24 and quite resistant to flare.rnChiaro is that it is less complex to big brother but it is also an object of dignified FF.rnStraconsigliato for those who have a high budget. |
 | sent on December 03, 2012 Pros: Compact, great value, price / performance, weight, cost Cons: Slight vignetting and CA at the shortest focal improves ... closing at least f5.6/6.3 Opinion: Great all-rounder economic, if not you can afford the "L" series for this range of focal lengths is a great zoom lens standard.rnMessa fast focus with USM and precisa.Resta compact even at maximum escursione.rnLa front lens is 67mm and does not rotate during setup fuoco.Da bring ovunque.rnAcquisto recommended |
 | sent on October 08, 2012 Pros: Focal range on FF, weight, compactness, clarity, good brightness, USM, affordable price. Cons: Slight vignetting at room temperature, some AC, lack IS. Opinion: I was looking for a good all-rounder and not too expensive and this Canon 24-85 home was for me. I had 24-70 and 28-70 and Canon do not feel the inferiority of the newcomer. Useful if you want to follow an event or event without losing time. Add also that the lens is well-defined and well compacted. In addition to having a light weight. I highly recommend it! |
 | sent on October 04, 2011 Pros: Focal range, weight, exceptional clarity at the center, especially the short and medium focal, lightness, USM autofocus, Color "Canon", brightness, good resistance to flare. Cons: Coloring at the corners, under heavy backlighting, vignetting at 24mm. Focal range is not very interesting on APS-C. Opinion: Use this light as a handyman on a 5d mark2, outlet being used, and I am quite satisfied, it is very practical and light combines good focal range to a discrete brightness (much like a constant F4). Fast autofocus, inaudible and precisissimo.rnMi am comfortable there, although sometimes a few millimeters more on the side "tele" could use. rnConfrontato with a canon 35 F2, at equal aperture the sharpness at the center is entirely comparable! There is a slight drop in performance at extreme angles, so that most of FF, where, however, is in any case very valid domostra already stopping down to F5.6, I think might be handy on the APS-H, where he became a interesting 31-110. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
