about | support

  Reviews by: Peter Kirk  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Peter Kirk to your Buddy List
Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM

Review Date: Dec 24, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $3,899.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: SHARPNESS, Speed, IS, Quality construction

The image quality from this lens is absolutely astonishing.
Even with the 1.4x converter, it is excellent.
Probably the best lens I have ever used...LOVE IT

Canon EOS 1D Mark II N

Review Date: Dec 15, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $3,999.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Screen, Better buffer than original, better focussing capability.
Still Heavy...LOL

Have had the 1D, 1DmkII, and now the mkIIN...not much of a change from the original mkII, but then again...how do you perfect something thats already perfect.
Top unit, extremely well designed. Cannot Fault this camera...I have been shooting with the original MkII from the first day it came out, and this camera is evry bit as good, and a bit.

Sigma 150mm f2.8 APO Macro DG EX HSM

Review Date: Nov 7, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $559.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Range ( 150mm) quality build, SHARP SHARP SHARP
Canon should have thought about this one.

I have had the Canon 100mm macro for several months now and I just updated to this lens, it is superb. Personally I found the Canon to be lacking in working distance, it did not suit my style of macrophotography.
Is this lens sharp???...it ROCKS.
well done Sigma, its as good as your 120-300f2.8.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

Review Date: Jul 14, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Canons FLAGSHIP lens,...what more can I say

I have owned the 2.8 version several years ago, sold it and got the 2.8 IS, sold it (too heavy), got the F4L, sold it and came back to the original 2.8 again...seems to be the sharpest of the lot, and works best with the 1.4xII and 2xII converters.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Review Date: Jul 14, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: probably the best mid range zoom out there
bit heavy, but then again theres a lot of glass in there..

Have had the Tamron 28-70f2.8XrDi for a while now, and I decided to go for Canons version just to compare results.
Tamron comes very close from f4 upwards, Canon wins hands down at ALL aperatures and zoom settings. Focussing speed on Canon is outstanding, the Tamrons weakness was mainly its focussing, hunting.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM

Review Date: Jul 14, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: sharp, light, fast focussing...well my copy is.
no hood....as standard

Sold my 135 F2L to get this lens...no regrets so far. LOVE LOVE LOVE the sharpness of this piece of glass.

Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM

Review Date: Jul 14, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Small, Light, sharp as sharp can be, beautiful bokeh, very nice colour rendition, IS
apart from the slight noise from the IS, this lens is perfect in every way.

I just sold both my Canon300f2.8L and my Sigma120-300f2.8,
Normally I would miss the extra stop, howeverwith the great high iso performance of modern day DLSR's not an issue. The lens is just as sharp as its big brother, almost half its size and weight....which makes this lens very usuable and handholdable. I cannot fault this lens it is absolutely superb. Birds, sports, fashion...the list goes on.

Canon Extender EF 1.4x II

Review Date: Mar 21, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $350.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: quality / strength

Optically i find it very very similar to the first version, I sold that one and bought this. Cannot fault this converter. I use it on my 135f2L...spectacular results..and also on my 300f2.8L. I have even satcked it with my 2x and shot the moon wide open..results blew me away. Some CA with both converters stacked, but apart from that excellent sharpness...using a 1DmkII.

Canon Extender EF 2x II

Review Date: Mar 21, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

Pros: get big leg's without spending big bucks.
2 stops

Its cheaper to use this and a 300f2.8 to get a 600f5.6, than outright purchasing the 600f4.
Its loss in image sharpness can be fixed slightly in post production. If used in good light, its hard to tell the quality loss. I dont recomend using this with any zoom whatsoever. it works very well with my 300f2.8 and my 135f2L.

Tamron 24-135MM F/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical (IF) Macro

Review Date: Mar 20, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

Pros: very sharp, nice and cheap
loud focussing

Good value for money....not "L" but sharp enough for the price

Canon EOS 1D

Review Date: Mar 20, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $3,000.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Built like a tank, goes on and on wthout fail, image quality is SUPERB, ver good detail for 4Mp
tad heavy

I already have a 1D mkII and I use the 1D as a backup....I find the image quality staright out of the camera is very very sharp with an enourmous amount of detail. Slightly noisy over 1000ASA but if you slightly overexpose by 1/3 stop no issues. Top Camera...will last for years and years. I had a 20D and sold it for the 1D, definately do not regret it at all.

Canon EF 35mm f/2

Review Date: Feb 17, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

Pros: small, lightweight, cost effective lens
soft at f2...comes good between 2.8 and 4...after that it rocks.

Canon EF 24mm f/2.8

Review Date: Feb 17, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 6 

Pros: sharp, its light, and compact, not too expensive.
No USM., no hood supplied...its an optional extra.

Slightly lowered contrast at 2.8
not as sharp as I expected

Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM

Review Date: Feb 7, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Superb bokeh, Very sharp @ f2, Superfast autofocus,even in low light. Big plus that you can attach extenders to this lens.
slight flare when pointed towards the sun without the hood...easily fixed...use the hood.

I have had this lens before....5 years ago....kept it for a week used it and sold it to get the 70-200f2.8L IS.
I regretted selling this lens...it was superb, and i havent been able to get this quality from my other lenses.
I purchased a "Grey" version of B&H and it is every bit as good as the one I had 5 years ago. In fact I paid half the price for this one..and I am very pleased indeed....HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

Review Date: Nov 2, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $900.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: optically brillliant...light as a feather for its range.
Collar could be supplied with the lens.

I have owned and sold the 70 -200 f 2.8L, and the 2.8L IS, both too heavy.
Image quality on this lens is equal if not better in some areas. The IS was not as good as this lens in image quality. Feature wise it was better, but monopod/tripod was a must with that lens. I walk around ALL day with this and no stress. Its a good size as well..small and compact. Highly recomended lens.

Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 XR Di Zoom AF

Review Date: Oct 13, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $480.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Cheap, light, small, quality optics.
construction could be better

Ive only had this lens for a week now...but Ive already shot over 1000 images in varying light conditions. What can I say, I traded my Canon 28-80 F2.8-4L in for this lens and I am overjoyed that I did.
Nothing against canon, the lens was sharp and great contrast...and very well built....but TOO HEAVY. This lens is just as sharp and Sharper in some areas and its constant 2.8 gives me more flexibility. I have also owned a 28-70 f2.8L for some time and this lens is "almost" its equal in optical resolution. Highly recomended....for the money spent. The way i figure it, if it lasts me 2 years as aworking pro, and then i replace it, Im still ahead....because in 2 years I replace it with a new (potentially) better version and not much money has been spent or lost.


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4  next