Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: John Daniel  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add John Daniel to your Buddy List
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

Review Date: Mar 26, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $625.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fast, precise, clear & contrasty images, light, short, discreet.
Front rotates, pastic contruction but, hey light cannot equal metal...

This rather cheap lens amazed me from day 1. I have a 70-200 f/2.8L IS and a 100-400 IS which are both heavy and great. I also had the 70-300 DO which I sold quickly because of poor optics. Well after several shots and tests (comparing this lens with the 70-200 f/4 that I had and sold), I have decided to buy the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS for my travels. Guess what, I am not disappointed. The only inconvenient I see are the rotative front that makes use of circular polarizer rather complexe and second, the plastic construction; well you have to take care of it more than an L lens. Although the construction is still very well made, the zoom is very smooth and fast, the IS and autofocus buttons are better than before so there are no risk anymore of swithching them off by mistake.

The optical is, without any hesitation, great and give you the opportunity to shoot discreetly at L ranges for a very small price.

I would give it a 10 but it is not an L so...

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

Review Date: Feb 18, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Clear pictures, fast focus, light (compared to 24-70), IS
a bit of vignetting at 24mm that is dissapeared at 25mm

Just sold my 24-70 f/2.8L but had time to do a shooting comparison. My conclusion are:
1: the 24-105 matches the 24-70 at all focals and sometimes surpasses it. It offers a longer range and best of all, Image Stabalization.

It would bee a 10 all the waay, but I had to remove 1 point for price.(but hey, it's an L )


Canon EOS 5D

Review Date: Nov 6, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $3,200.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Photographs details and dynamic range. options for quick choices and customs settings; new photographs type system; full 24X36 frame for 17X11 prints; extreme low light focus, excellent ISO from 50 to 1600 for large prints; a lot more details and precision in pictures; very solid construction (feels great); I love it.
No flash but hey it is a pro type camera and for me it's not a problem, lower multiple shot speed(3pps). That's it.

Coming from the 20D and still using an EOS 3, I have been enjoying this new camera. I am more into landscape and animals-birds photography and this 5D is providing great dynamic range and details when using smaller apertures (really better than the 20D). If someone says it's a steroids 20D, this person has not used or understand the capacities of these 2 cameras. Yes the 5D shares some of the 20D characteristics, but it is different in photo quality and choice process as well as sensor size. Noise is also better controlled thn the 20D.

The body is a solid construction; better design than 20D for connectors and the set button option for choice is great. I did not mention anything on the large 2.5 inches LCD screen: well it is finally usable to see the quality of a picture up to a higher level of details.

Still being in position to compare to film I would say the 5D is really comparable if not better than film in the opportunies it offers and in quality of pictures. So far I am very satisfied and cannot think of a real bad side of it for what I use it for.

Even the price is OK when you think that the 1DS MKII is twice a much money.

Canon EOS 20D

Review Date: Nov 6, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Quick focus, fast multiple shots(great for action photography), very good quality for 8X10 prints. Very low noise and usable for quality prints from ISO 100 to 800. Light, great colors. Pretty good in low light. Forgives for lower quality lenses.
A little small, photographs a bit fussy in details especially in lanscape with a near subject at small apertures (when compared to film), but a lot better than Rebel and Rebel XT.

I have been using the 20D after selling the Rebel for a whole year in parallel to my EOS 3. It was a great camera (I say "was" because I have sold it to buy the 5D - see my 5D review). Fast focus in rather low light, great noice control compared to the 300D, 10D and older cameras from Canon. Fast multiple shots (5pps). It had great quality for bird photographs and action photographs and even "some" lanscape to be printed on 8X10. Options on type of pictures, which I did not use myself, was pretty complete from someone not used to make decisions on apertures and speed.

I do a lot of bird pictures and lanscape (city and nature) and I observed a lack on precision in details from the camera; especially for lanscape photographs with low aperture where you want details standing out from near subjects or background.

Otherwise, It was a great camera !

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

Review Date: Dec 14, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $750.00 | Rating: 6 

Pros: Light, sheaper , good focus, good lens
Not great in low light, pin cushion.

Had this lens for 3 months before selling and buying a 16-35 which I really prefer because of the greater aperture opening and the wider range; at a multiplying factor of 1.6, the 17-40 is less wide by almost 2 mm than the 16-35.

I had problems in low light situation where the 17-40 is too slow for me.

otherwise it is a good lens.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

Review Date: Dec 14, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,600.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Extremely fast, tack sharp even with extenders(1.4 and 2.0), my favorite, magnificent bokeh.

I have this lens for almost a year. For candid, some landscapes, travel, even birds when they are not too far or with an extender, this lens is a top pro one. The range is also very practical for a multitude of usage.

Focus is extremely fast and precise, IS give you a real break of 2 stops and the bokeh at wide open is really something you have to see. The only dark side would be the weight of the lens, but hey, you have to pay a little for what you get with this lens; after a few days, you get use to it anyway.

Remarkable peace of glass for Canon ! A+

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

Review Date: Dec 3, 2004 Recommend? no | Price paid: $409.00 | Rating: 2 

Pros: Cheap nice range
Cheap, distortion, not great quality image

Very poor product for the price paid. You pay for the name but there is no quality in this lens.

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

Review Date: Oct 31, 2004 Recommend? no | Price paid: $1,350.00 | Rating: 2 

Pros: Size, range, IS, the green ring, that's all.
FLARE (honeycomb form flares), stiff zoom, lock unpractical, very ordinary precision, image quality. Autofocus is a bit slow.

Poor for the price. what a deception. After reading the hoo haaas from Canon, I rush to get this practical size long range zoom which I dreamed to be my vacation/travel lens. I have felt low...

See negative points. I have sold it 2 months after buying it with a 30% loss.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Review Date: Oct 31, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,400.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharpness, great built quality, bokeh, precision, fast in low light, fast focus.
a bit heavy.

This lens is a great L lens. On eof my favorite. Great building quality, great bokeh, autofocus is fast. ğlens allows you to take inside pictures faster. My favorite lens for in town pictures and some Outdoor.

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

Review Date: Oct 31, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,550.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fast, fast focus, image quality, colors, wiiide, built quality (you feel it)
Have to buy a slim polarizer for it.

This lens is fast in low light conditions, fast autofocus. Great precision and quality of image. Very wide on my EOS 3. Indoor or outdoor it is a great lens. Great quality of built.


Page:  1 · 2