Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: David Lozoya  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add David Lozoya to your Buddy List
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Review Date: Dec 31, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,149.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Build quality was superb, image quality (edge to edge) was very good.
Not good at the corners on FF (5D)

The build of this beast is stellar, mechanics are second to none. I know there are some duds out there and I don't think mine is one of those. If a lens exhibits excellent contrast, bokeh, no front/back focusing issues, center/edge/corner sharpness...then keep it! Any lens that can achieve all of the above criteria is stellar in my book and hard to find. This lens met all but the corner criteria.

I see that a lot of folks highly rate this lens...some of these reviews are with 1.3 or 1.6 cameras...essentially masking the corner issue. Please go back and look very carefully at your 24-70 using a full frame camera and look at the corners. There you might see (I hope not) what I saw - fuzziness. After all its a zoom lens, a very good one I might add but one that does appear to have a flaw.

I compared the 24-70 to a Contax Zeiss 28mm 2.8. The 24-70 did very well in other regions of the frame and was close to the Zeiss in overall resolution (the Zeiss is slightly better) but the Zeiss ate it for lunch at the corners. Yes, I know that the Zeiss is a fixed focal length and 3 to 4 times cheaper. Even even without the comparison, the 24-70 is below average at the corners....unacceptable in my book. In another comparison to my 17-40 (a very good copy) the 24-70 was better in all categories...but my 17-40 also exhibited the same below average corners.

Again, a marvelous lens for 1.3 and 1.6 crop cameras. If I had one of those bodies I would not hesitate using it.

Tokina 24-200mm AT-X 242 AF

Review Date: May 28, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 5 

Pros: Built like a tank, easy to hold and well balanced.
Optics are so-so

I tried this lens recently...hoping to match it up with a D60 for my son. No luck. Perhaps I received a bad copy.

My standard tests involve a brick wall, tripod mounted and check each f-stop and zoom range. Test was conducuted on a 20D. Second phase of my testing process is to test using everyday subjects.

The lens seems well built, just wished that the optics would have been up to the challenge. Optically, I was disappointed at the results. IMHO, the optics were OK...not great. The lens could achieve a satisfactory image if you worked at it. The images never poped out at WOW factor. Please don't get me can produce a sharp image at f8 but unfortunately only around the center of the frame, as you approached the edges (1.6 factor no less) the image became soft....always, regardless of f-stop used. The sweet spot (on my copy) was around 35-150. At 200mm the image iwas very soft even stopped down to f8.

I really wanted this lens to work as I thought it would have been a perfect walk-around for my son. Very easy to send this one back...

Canon EF 28-105 F/3.5-4.5 II USM

Review Date: May 28, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $240.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Size/weight, fast focusing, price, sharpness...for the money its hard to beat
soft at both extreme ends

I just bought this little gem for my son's D60. Couldn't be happier. I searched far and wide for an affordable mid-range lens for his D60...and I found it. Color, sharpness and mechanics are very good...if you consider the price point. Will add that you cannot expect L glass performance, but for the price itís the next best alternative. The lens is very capable and produces sharp, contrasty images. Wide open its soft at the extreme ends, stopping down it sharpens predictably. From 35-90 or so you get the sweet spot. As with all lenses you may have to shop around to find a good copy. Rated it a 9 due to its ability to perform nicely at the $240 price point. Hard to beat...