[Dave]

As I'm yet to try out most of the lenses for optical quality, I thought i would at least share my thoughts on general build quality vs Nikon lenses I have experienced to date

Canon 24-105mm F4 L
Beautifully crafted lens that is on par with Nikon Pro lens build quality
Reviews here :- Pixalo Photographic Equipment Reviews - EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM -

Canon 50mm f/1.8 MKII
Absolutely awful !!! This thing looks like it should be on some kids fisher price toy ! Cheap , horrible plastic. The Nikon equivalent is only £10 more & in a different league.
Reviews here :- Pixalo Photographic Equipment Reviews - EF 50mm f1.8 MKII -

Canon 85mm f/1.8
Now this is more like it. Feels quality & equivalent to Nikon
Reviews here :- Pixalo Photographic Equipment Reviews - EF 85mm f/1.8 USM -

Canon 70-200 L F4
Well built & solid, but feels almost industrial in it's finish. That main tube looks like a metal drain pipe that has been sprayed with hammerite. Can't complain at the money though .... probably the best value L lens going & more solid than similar priced Nikon glass.
Reviews here :- Pixalo Photographic Equipment Reviews - EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM -

Canon 100-400 L IS
Woah, this must have been unbolted from a tank or something. This takes the industrial statement on the above lens to another level. Not only a drain pipe but a couple of scaffold attachment bolted on for good effect It's built extremely well, but just a bit industrial vs the more refined finish I am used to with Nikon lenses
Reviews here :- Pixalo Photographic Equipment Reviews - EF 100-400mm f4.5/5.6L USM IS -

So overall a good standard of workmanship , apart from the joke of the 50mm, & just a different finish that I am used to


I'll report back my findings on image quality etc once I have had time to play with all the lenses

See also :- Comparing Nikon to Canon

[Larne]

Got to agree on the 50mm f/1.8 Mk II. I just bought one to replace my Mk I which has finally died and I was horrified at how plasticky the new version is.

I have read reports that the optics on the Mk II are better than the package would tend to lead one to believe but haven't really put mine through the test yet to be sure.

[Geir Andersen]

I bought my 50mm f/1.8 MKII a couple of weeks ago, and I had the exact same response: Horrible feeling. I haven't used it much yet, but the shots I have taken are good and I do like the thing. The feeling though is as you say... Like it's made for a simple little toy!

[j sotelo]

Originally Posted by Dave

As I'm yet to try out most of the lenses for optical quality, I thought i would at least share my thoughts on general build quality vs Nikon lenses I have experienced to date

Canon 24-105mm F4 L
Beautifully crafted lens that is on par with Nikon Pro lens build quality

Canon 50mm f/1.8 MKII
Absolutely awful !!! This thing looks like it should be on some kids fisher price toy ! Cheap , horrible plastic. The Nikon equivalent is only £10 more & in a different league.

Canon 85mm f/1.8
Now this is more like it. Feels quality & equivalent to Nikon

Canon 70-200 L F4
Well built & solid, but feels almost industrial in it's finish. That main tube looks like a metal drain pipe that has been sprayed with hammerite. Can't complain at the money though .... probably the best value L lens going & more solid than similar priced Nikon glass.

Canon 100-400 L IS
Woah, this must have been unbolted from a tank or something. This takes the industrial statement on the above lens to another level. Not only a drain pipe but a couple of scaffold attachment bolted on for good effect It's built extremely well, but just a bit industrial vs the more refined finish I am used to with Nikon lenses

So overall a good standard of workmanship , apart from the joke of the 50mm, & just a different finish that I am used to


I'll report back my findings on image quality etc once I have had time to play with all the lenses

See also :- Comparing Nikon to Canon

You shouldn't have gone to the Darkside
Whatever the Darklord promised you, its not true... LOL



Seriously, I hope it works out good with your new equipment.

[mountain wilderness]

Sounds good Dave, i am keen to here what your thoughts are on the 100-400 is L, i have this lens and am still trying to convince myself it is a good lens-and that i made the right choice instead of buying the 400 5.6L, my first thoughts were you could hammer nails in with the bloody thing-once you get use to holding it its alright-one thing i would like to point out to you with this lens is it is very easy to bump the focus ring after you have auto focused as it is full time manual focus as well which can be done with out noticing you have done it-untill you look at where your left hand is holding the lens, i had to adjust my way of holding this lens as this problem was resulting in soft shots-hope this helps! also interested in hearing about your 24-105 is F4 L i was all set to buy this lens when a Tamron 24-135 lens came up for sale second hand with the seller raving about what a great lens it was and how this was a VERY sharp version of the lens and not to buy the L lens-only reason he was selling as he was going to Nikon-well i got it for 1/3 of the cost of the L and it is VERY SHARP even wide open but cant help wondering if i should have gone for the canon with IS and better build/weather sealed etc.....keen to here your results

[P-E]

I know what you mean re the 50mm 1.8 II and to be honest I've never really used it.

[spxxxx]

I just put an extension tube on the 50 f/1.8 and keep it for ring shots ...... also handy to have in case of an emergency - but not much more

[fionaB]

have to say,............ what do u expect for the price regarding the nifty? cheap and cheerful with fabulous image quality.

I am lucky enough to have the 100-400mm L IS for a few weeks on loan and i am having a hrd time putting it down! its a fabulous lens and i want one..............

[Dave]

Added review links to 1st post