about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: Christopher-J  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Christopher-J to your Buddy List
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

24-105lisusm
Review Date: Jun 20, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $950.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Super Sharp! Has 3-stop IS! One of Canon's newest L lens designs! Works great on a 1.6 crop and 1D series cameras.
Cons:
Others saying it is soft for a L. Not sure what others are talking about because this lens is super sharp. NEGATIVE: Price, gotta pay like $500 for that Image Stabilizer why?

I have never owned a finer lens then the 24-105 f4 IS L lens. I have owned a Canon 28-80 f2.8-4 L and a Canon 24-70 f2.8 L. I have owned a Canon 17-40 f4 L and also a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 DG EX as well. I have searched for a lens like this for many years and now that I have found it. It is never leaving myside!

I did extensive testing between the 24-70 f2.8 L and this lens, because I had both for awhile to see which I liked best. Well to my amazement this "slow" f4 24-105 lens did better in all my tests over the 24-70L. And I had a good copy of the 24-70L! In fact the only thing I can think of that makes the f2.8 24-70L desireable is the f2.8, I think that in every other way the 24-105 f4 IS L is a better lens. That is if you can live with a f4. I can and I am loving it.


 
Canon EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 II

ef_28-80_35s_1_
Review Date: Dec 11, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 1 

 
Pros: Its free with the camera
Cons:
Its free with the camera

This lens is the PLASTIC UNFANTASTIC. I remmeber getting this lens thrown in free when I bought a used Canon Rebel G (the first one) and it was absolute garbage. It did not work well for a film camera with prints 4X6 and I can not see how this lens would work at all for a digital SLR camera. It was so bad that I bought a 17 year old EOS lens to replace it that was L lens quality compared to this cheap lens. It simply was the worst lens I ever owned. AVOID

 
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

ef_24-70_28u_1_
Review Date: Dec 11, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $950.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: fast focus, SUPER sharp images, great color, great range, makes me feel like I can shoot anything!
Cons:
Price but only if you don't look at it as something you will use for years, once you look at it that way the price works out to be very little permonth over the life of the lens.

Coming from the Canon 28-80 f2.8-4 L and then the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 DG EX, two very excellent lenses I decided to treat myself to something I read was pure gold. What I read was absolutely correct the Canon 24-70 f2.8 L is pure gold, it is a masterpiece in a Professional grade lens that works flawlessly with digital SLR cameras.

Released in November 2002 it is fairly new. Replacing the now discontinued 28-70 f2.8 L that was released back in November 1993. This new lens was basically rebuilt from the previous model to allow close focusing of 0.38m/1.3ft which is the closest focus in this class range. It also had a circular diaphragm added to it so the background blur is smooth and beautiful for those that like what is artistically called bokeh. The build of this lens is L quality, built like a tank and the filter size is 77.

The weight of this lens weighs pretty much the same as the 28-70 L, 28-80 L and Sigma 24-70 EX DG lenses which although seem heavy at first you move past the weight once you see the images it produces. Ah yes, did you think I forgot to mention the Image Quality? I saved the best for last.

After playing around with this lens the first time I went to my computer opened Adobe Photoshop and began to do the long task of photo processing once the images were on my computer. Then my eyes fully opened and I was amazed at the quality of not only the images razor sharpness but also the color it produces. No other L lens I have has done this good. The images are simply amazing.

So if you can afford the (around) $1200 US retail this lens sells for brand new I would certainly add it to your gear. It is worth it in every way!


 
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

ef70_200_28_1_
Review Date: Nov 18, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: S-U-P-E-R S-H-A-R-P!!! Great build!!! Fantastic Quality!!!
Cons:
It is white. Yeah I know get over it, but I would pay an extra $100 for a black finnish! Weight if you have small hands/arms it could be a problem.

This is simply one of the best lenses I have ever owned in my life and it will be hard to top it!

Coming from the 70-200mm f4L version to this one I was already used to not needing Image Stabilization (IS) so the transition from the two lenses was simple. The only difference between the two was the f4 could focus just a wee bit closer then this f2.8 lens.

I bought it used from a great guy who kept it in mint condition and it was a wonderful bargain for me. In Canada this lens can cost as much as $1700 CAD which is just too much but even at that, if there was no USA to buy from cheap it would be worth it as it is such a useful lens.

My only quarrel with this lens is that it is white, not a big deal as I own a few white lenses but I am a big fan of black lenses. Seeing though that I am not a Paparazzi trying to sneak up on celeberties it is not that big of a deal, but like my car, I like black.

So do yourself a favour if you are considering this lens. Buy it. Only buy the IS version if you have small hands, are weak or jittery because it really doesn't need it as far as I am concerned. The weight is heavy but it should be for a lens of this calibure. I don't have any problems with it but I am the size of a Pro Athlete like a football player or wrestler.

Do I recommend? YES!!! Best $1000+ you can spend on photo gear. IMO.


 
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

ef50mmf_14usm_1_
Review Date: Nov 18, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: $350.00 | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: Leightweight, Fast AF, 90% sharp.
Cons:
It is boring to use. The 50mm f1.8 MKII just as good IMO.

Chalk me up as a guy that only likes telephoto primes but I find that this lens is somewhat boring. It takes great pictures and are 90% sharp all the time but the focal length on a APS-C camera is just too long where you only can get head shots in a medium sized room. With that said I can't see myself keeping this lens for too much longer as my Nifty 50 (f1.8 MKII) does the same job and quality.

Do I recommend? No! Save yourself money and buy the 50mm f1.8 MKII.


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

24_70EX_med_1_
Review Date: Oct 8, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $500.00 | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: PRICE!!! BUILD!!! Includes a hood! Nice matte black color.
Cons:
As everyone has said 82mm filter size! Sometimes unable to focus in dark.

At less then half the price of say a Canon 24-70 f2.8 L lens this lens is a pretty good alternative. It is not the best alternative but pretty much the only for the camera brand alternative with exception to maybe the 28-70 from Tamron.

The lens is well built and does provide very good images. It does however have to search in low light. A condition that isn't all that rare to non Professional series lenses.

Sharpness is not a question with this lens. It is very sharp. The ease of use is good also. And I like how the lens starts off at 70mm and goes down to 24mm as usually I zoom to the longer end more then the wide end, it saves me micro seconds! That's right microseconds!

Overall it is a very good lens for anyone who either doesnt use this range much (eg picky pixel peepers) or a AWESOME lens for beginner or photographer on a budget. Even a advanced photographer should most likely like this lens.

In Canada the warrenty is 10years! In the USA I hear it is only 4 but amazing to get anything more then 1 year in this day of age from anyone. And their customer service I hear is also supurb!

A great alternative to the expensive lenses from Canon or Nikon. Try it out, you might just like it.


 
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

ef17-40_4l_1_
Review Date: Sep 29, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Light weight, Super Sharp! Better then the 17-35 f2.8 any day of the week. And the picture, wow the pictures it produces is amazing!
Cons:
The hood. Good grief is this a big hood. Does it even do anything?

Complete Junk! If junk is a word for "The best lens under $1000 ever made!" that is what I would call this lens, Junk. It is simply put one of the best lenses I have ever owned.

I had a 17-35 f2.8 L lens and simply put, I got rid of it for this awesome lens. I can't believe that this is able to work so well with out distorting everything like other wide angle lenses.

Only thing I don't like about this lens is the GIANT hood it comes with. The hood is as tall as a 20D with grip! It is so big I am not even sure how it is even supposed to work. Other then that you can't get a better lens from canon.

I would even Dare say it gives the 16-35 f2.8 a run for the money and that you should only buy that expensive lens if you really need f2.8, if you are using this lens with a flash or landscapes, do your wallet a favour and buy this gem. You wont regret it. I didnt.


 
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

ef70_200_4_1_
Review Date: Jul 13, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $578.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Tack sharp IQ! One size, doesn't extend outward! Light weight and easy to use.
Cons:
It's white! The hood is somewhat ugly and cheap.

I bought this lens as a replacement for my 75-300mm IS lens. I canned that lens because it wasnt sharp. Even the loss of 100mm with the 70-200 f4L was well worth it. Its so sharp that I can crop better then ever before. I like everything about this lens except the color and the monster sized hood.

 
Canon EOS 20D

20d
Review Date: Jul 4, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Amazing image quality! Lightweight Alloy! Its BLACK!!! The price is great considering how much DSLRs are.
Cons:
Its a cheaper build then the Canon 10D. The battery grip doesn't mold to the camera body making it look bulky.

How great is the Canon 20D compared to most other SLR cameras out there? There is no comparison (unless the D series or 5d). The only one in its price range that might come close is the the Nikon D100. The D100 doesnt come close enough though.

I've been into photography since 1999. Only recently though have I moved from Film SLR to Digital SLR. It IS/WAS very expensive but the results I have got were totally worth it.

The 20D has been replaced by the Canon EOS 30D. However the 30D is just an improved 20D mainly in the software areas of the camera. Issues that really didn't need that much improvement in the first place. One of the great things about Canon EOS SLR cameras. Is that they can use any EF lens mount lens from Canon and most other third party lens will also work no matter if they were for Film or Digital SLR cameras. Only bad side is the 1.6 crop factor when taking wide angle pictures but its a bonus when doing telephoto pictures.

For its price you will not find a better camera. I give it a 8 out of 10 only because of the 1.6 crop factor because I mainly take pictures of Landscapes and buildings. My recommendations after getting a 20D is to invest in good lens.