Koffie, thats wher you and I are different, I dont read a lot of photography forums. I try and use as many lenses as I can (borrow & rent) of the focal range used.
For example;
You gonna tell me the 55-200 canon lense beats the hell out of the 70-200F2.8L? And better still that same 55-200 performs better at 200mm than the 200F2.8L?
And also the 75-300, beats all the the L lenses in that focal area?
Where do you get that from? Firstly, my "size matters" comment referred
specifically to comparing the
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM and
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM. I like the latter for it's compactness in my bag, and since I travel a fair bit, I don't depend on my photography to put food on the table, the slight performance difference and price is an acceptible compromise for me. It performs better than my Sigma 70-300 at the extremes anyway.
Secondly, I never even mentioned the 55-200 or 75-300 or any other lens v.s. the 70-200L models. Maybe you're confusing me with someone else. I don't have, and have never tried the 55-200 or 75-300. I was simply stating that it has a red line around doesn't mean it's the best glass ever made at that focal length, and I stand by that. I cited the 50mm f/1.2 as a specific example that many professionals who have spend the money on it, are disappointed with. I have read many times over that it is not as good in any respect (except price) as the 50mm f/1.0 it replaces. I've also ran into
this setup more than I expected - makes you think.
I agree on the 50mm comaprison, even tho I have not had the opportunity to use the F1.2. I stopped at F1.4, as to me the price difference from F1.8 down to F1.4, does not warrant a possible buy. The 1.4 battles with finding proper focus, so the motor in the lense aint gonna last..... At under ZAR1200 the 1.8 is a steal.
I have tried several of the f/1.4 models and have not had thsi problem. If I ever feel the need for a 50mm, that's the one I'll get. For now, I have opted for a 35mm f/2 which gives me roundabout the same angle of view that the 50mm on my K1000 does.
There is a reason why some lenses are just a lot more expensive. Try a 300 F2.8 L IS, it wins hands down in that focal length, and so does the 200F2.8L, and I dont think the 100 Macro has equals either.
Sure the forums are great, but all forums are the same where every peep, praises his own stuff.
Like I said, I was referring to an example of people who are not happy with their "own stuff."
Anyway, that fact that you're getting this much varied responses on the qualities of this lens and whichever other one should tell you that maybe there's a consistency problem on Canon's part, which is disappointing. Considering the manufactuing technology we have available (and have had for the last 20 years), there really shouldn't be any difference between samples.
)
