|
torgeaux posted:Consider the 24-105 over the 24-70. Lighter, sharp, and the f/4 is a non-factor for wide, really. The 24-70 F/4L IS is lighter than the 24-105 F/4L IS.  windex posted:I have the Sigma 24mm Art, which is a great lens, but I bought it before the 20mm Art was announced, which I would consider instead, now. The 35 Art and 50 1.4 are my go-to low-light lenses at the moment. I think I really just want to have coverage wider than 35. Sounds like the 16-35 F/4L IS is the winner!
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:26 |
|
|
I grabbed a 16-35 F/4L and I like it so far!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:There's also the 17-40 f/4 L that's even cheaper. One of the cheapest L-series zooms available afaik. And pretty good by most accounts. I'd previously owned a 17-40L but the 16-35 F/4L has IS and better sharpness overall. I think it was worth the premium so far!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
Verman posted:Sterlingtek are great and reliable. I've used them in all my cameras for nearly a decade with zero issues. Seconding this. I've got 4 backup SterlingTek batteries for my 5D3.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Verman posted:Sterlingtek is the brand I've used for the last 12 years or so. I used them with my olympus and then my canon dslrs. They've been around a while and their batteries are usually sold in a 2 pack and $15 each or less. Zero issues, they usually have the same or higher capacity than the original. Same, Sterlingtek had been my go-to for 3rd party batteries since my Rebel XT.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2018 20:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:26 |
|
|
Is this lens compression?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2019 18:39
|
|
