Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: JohnJ80  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add JohnJ80 to your Buddy List
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM

Review Date: Jun 22, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp, great IS, light weight and very portable.

Very sharp. Hard to believe but lens to lens with my non IS version, it is sharper.

The newest IS from Canon is really quite amazing. You an handhold this lens with ease. It is a wonderful travel lens and probably Canon's best zoom out right now.


Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM

Review Date: Jul 7, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Very sharp, great IS, light, built in hood, very fast USM focus.
Slower AF with 1.4x TC

I use this to shoot U12 and U14 soccer on a FF camera. The AF is so fast that it will track a player in motion for quite some time.

When the shot happens it is SHARP.

The only problem with this lens is that when the Canon 1.4x TC II is used, the AF slows way down. If you partially manually focus it, the lens will get it the rest of the way there very quickly. Sharpness and image quality with TC are very good, slightly less sharp than without.


Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

Review Date: Mar 13, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,095.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Nice portable size, 24 is 'somewhat' wide on a 1.6X crop camera, very sharp, great contrast

I have none of the flare issues that have been reported on early models. My copy is very sharp, has that great L color and saturation.

I like its size, relatively compact for its range.


Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC

Review Date: Jul 28, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $414.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp from center to edge, nice performance at f2.8 across range, faithful color reproduction, nice build, nice size.

I really like this lens.

Focusing is spot on dead center when I tested this on my chart in good light at f2.8 on my 350D matching my Canon lenses for focus accuracy (tested against the 28-135 IS USM and the 70-200 F4L).

Shots are crisp, sharp, good color saturation and reproduction. Performance and shots at f2.8 have been nice and sharp too.

The size is nice and it fits well on the 350D, comes well to had for shooting. Heavy enough for a good build but not overly heavy or cumbersome to use. This thing has been hard to take off my camera since I got it - surprised me how often I reach for it.

From what I can tell, this lens pushes hard on 17-40L quality and is certainly worth a look since it is so much less expensive. I don't think you are giving up anything by getting this lens over the 17-40.

As far as comparing this to the kit lens from Canon (18-55) - there is no comparison. I mean NO comparison. Your 18-55 will be headed for eBay in a hurry after you use this lens.

Highly recommended.

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

Review Date: Jul 28, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: $409.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: USM focus is fast. IS helps in low light still life shots
Too heavy, too bulky, glass too slow. Image quality mediocre, serious purple fringing (PF) in corners and edges.

I had some great expectations for this lens but it just seems so, well... mediocre. Doesn't seem to do anything great, but also isn't terrible. This just is not one of Canon's better efforts.

The sharpness is acceptable but not compelling. The thing is LARGE and HEAVY for what it does. It is substantially larger and heavier than offerings from Sigma or Tamron. When its on a strap around your neck, the lens wants to flip the camera over (on a 350D). Not a great walk around lens - there are other better choices.

The lens is acceptably sharp, but nothing that leaps out at you or worth getting excited about.. You definitely need to post process the images unlike with my 70-200 F4L or my Sigma 18-50 f2.8.

My lens also has a tendency for some serious purple fringing along the edges and corners. By this I mean, 20-30% in from the edge not just right at the edge.

The glass is relatively slow but can do well in low light for still life shots because of the IS. I have had success hand holding at about 100mm at 1/8s for example. However, unless you are shooting still life this won't help you with motion blur and at those shutter speeds, the slightest, slowest motion leads to blur. So, I guess I would have been more excited about this if this had maybe been an f2.8 across at least part of the range for use with the IS. The IS does not make up for the fact that the glass is slow to begin with.

Anyhow, I think there are better choices out there for the money, unless of course, you don't object to mediocre. Knowing what I know now, I would have gotten something else instead or put the money towards the outstanding 70-200 F4L from canon or the 70-200 f2.8 from Sigma. This one in on my camera maybe 5% of the time.