Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: Peter Gregg  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Peter Gregg to your Buddy List
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

Review Date: Mar 31, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,350.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Excellent at everything
none - well, the price, but you get what you pay for.

This lens excells in every aspect. It is the best lens I own so far and I highly recommend it. Coming from MF cameras, it is the only lens that reminds me of my lenses from my pro MF SLR's, a real pro lens.

Peter Gregg

Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX Aspherical DG DF

Review Date: Mar 31, 2003 Recommend? no | Price paid: $395.00 | Rating: 4 

Pros: At F8 and above it is a decent lens.
Too soft.

I would not recomend this lens. At F4 and wider the images are too soft. In fact, I though some of my images were out of focus and they were not. At F2.8 the pictures are unacceptable.

Bottom line, save your money and buy something your digital camera deserves. The Sigma 28-70 EX 2.8 lens is far far better, in fact it rates the same as Canon's 28-135 IS lens, plus it gives you F2.8 to boot. The 2.8 is important because the focusing mechanism on the cameras do much better with more light coming into the sensors.


Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX APO IF HSM

Review Date: Mar 31, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $597.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Very sharp. With this lens you know you have a "reference level" lens.
No IS.

This is a secret sleeper lens from Sigma. The Canon version is 4.1 at Photodo, the Sigma is 3.9. The good part is, the Canon 28-70 2.8 L lens has a rating of 3.9. The Sigma is clearly in the L catagory.

The pictures from this lens are tack sharp and amazing. Unless you need the IS, and don't think so easily you don't, this 2.8 lens is a sleeper and a real steal. I recomended it highly.