Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: DmitriM  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add DmitriM to your Buddy List
Canon EOS 20D

Review Date: Sep 12, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,400.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: quality,price,weight,

I got this camera a few weeks after it came out. It was a replacement to my 10D,which ended up being a backup camera.
20D is an excellent all around camera. I don't understand people who question it. It's far easier to blame your camera then yourself...
I've used it for sports,fashion,travel,etc. It's relatively lightweight compared to the 1D series 'bricks'.
AF focusing however is not the best I've seen. It was improved with the release of a few new successors. Still,it was a great camera for the money.
Right now a used 20D can be purchased for less than $700,making it an awesome budget camera. If you don't need a large LCD screen,picture styles,auto iso or similar small improvements,then I would definitely suggest this camera to anyone.

All the pictures in Wedding,fashion and Sport sections were shot with a 20D.

Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX APO RF HSM

Review Date: Aug 29, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $750.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Reach,quality,PRICE
weight,some ghosting

Sigma..Bigma.. I bought this lens a few years ago,to complement my Canon 70-200 2.8. I bought this lens for wildlife photography. I first had a try of Canon 100-400,but didn't find push/pull as comfortable as I'd hoped. Sharpness wasn't the greatest. Then I bought this lens off a person on FM. I was really scared at first,but first pictures made me smile. This lens is really good.

Sharp. Not as sharp as my L's,but it's worth every penny I paid. I used it for for some motorsport photography with ok results. It doesn't track subjects as good as 70-200 does. You also need a tripod to use this lens or at least 1/500s,in order to get sharp shots. It's pretty heavy and extremely hard to hold this lens without moving.
Weird: f6.3 on this camera=f5 on any other lenses that I own. Basically they look a touch darker in the viewfinder and darker they come out.. I don't know how else to explain it.

On my website, all the animal,bird photos were taken with the sigma.

Also,here's out of the camera photo that was taken at 8mp at 500mm f6.3. download and judge the quality by yourself.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Review Date: Aug 28, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $950.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: quality,build
dust. It does get in,but can withstand it much better than other lenses no IS...

Owned this one for a few years.One of the best lenses to own. Sure it's expensive,but you get the top quality. You can get away with sigma or Tamron,which can be very close,but if you want the best,this is the one. Hopefully Canon will release an IS version of this lens. It would be a huge success. IS lenses get cheaper and cheaper. I don't see a reason why they can't make this happen..for a few hundred $$ more.(though,there are some IS lenses that cost $200)
Most of my shots in my fashion section of my website were taken with this lens( )

Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM

Review Date: Apr 17, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharp,IS(very useful)and wide angle.I am happy with my purchase(had to sell 24-70 for this one)
There's no dust seal and it sucks dust much more than any other lens I have. No hood was included,while it IMHO it should,based on price. EFS mount,means I can't use it on a non crop body. 70-200L 2.8 focuses better in low light than this lens.

I hope Canon will introduce IS on their new EF 16-35 2.8...

I am happy with the lens overall. It stays on my camera mostly. Very good focus range. I had 24-70 before,but sold it to get this lens. I tested it at the store and found no difference in sharpness.
It's still not as good as the L,but maybe Canon will hear us and update it with a better version of it,with a dust seal and other extras