about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: Peter Kotsa  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Peter Kotsa to your Buddy List
Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM

EF14
Review Date: Nov 27, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,449.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Lightweight, looks and feels superb, sharp from 2.8 up.
Cons:
Cost..ouch

I guess you get what you pay for.
This is one of those lenses. I have not had any experience with the first version of this lens, but I can confidently say that this particular version is a wonderful piece of glass to shoot with.
Firstly focussing is something you need to get right when using such a wide lens.
It is crisp from 2.8 up. Edges are surprisingly very sharp, (I say this because I have heard that Canon cannot make a good wide angle lens, well thats not true with this lens).

I have used the Nikon 14-24 on a D3 and although I found the lens to be very sharp, possibly a tad sharper than the Canon, I also found it boring. Nothing intended against Nikon, i just think that the 14-24 lacks character. Thats where the 14mm 2.8L II stands its ground. It reminds me of my old Zeiss 16mm Hologon. It has a similar feel to the images it produces. Distortions are almost non existent on this lens.
I was expecting big rounded horizons and walls that look like they are bulging, but NO.
In fact almost perfect straight lines edge to edge. WOW, this lens is better in sharpness and distortion than the 16-35 2.8L II.
If sharpness alone is your thing, get a 14-24 Nikon, it is amazing and a freak lens.
If you want a sexy looking lens that produces images that say WOW statements, then the 14mm2.8LII is definitely the go.
Extremely happy with this purchase.


 
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM

ef_100_28_1_
Review Date: Aug 12, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Fast focus, Sharp even at 2.8, lightweight
Cons:
no collar included

One of the best value macros around.
Certainly sharp as an "L", and focus speed is considerably faster than the 180mm.
I have had the Sigma 150 mm 2.8 and the Canon 50 mm 2.5, and I find that this lens is faster in focussing than both, and better images quality as well.


 
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM

ef70-200lisusm
Review Date: Jul 6, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: weight, size, IS, IMAGE QUALITY
Cons:
$$$

What can I say, I have had all four versions of the 70-200 models.
This is by far the sharpest, and most pleasing to use (very lightweight)
The only downside of this beast is f4. In every other area this lens is a freak. Well done Canon, at last.


 
Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM

ef400mmf_56_1_
Review Date: Mar 30, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,400.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: weighs next to nothing, SHARP as a tac, fast focusing
Cons:
no image stabilizer

an amazing lens indeed. I use it for sports mainly and it can keep up just as good as the 300 2.8 does. For versatility and ease of use it is an excellent choice.
Did I mention that this lens is SHARP, oops I almost cut myself again..lol



 
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L USM

ef85mmf_12_1_
Review Date: Feb 6, 2008 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: 1.2 aperture, "L" glass.
Cons:
Heavy , expensive, very very very slow to focus....ridiculously slow

This is an interesting lens indeed. Although I found the lens to be quite sharp, I also found it to be almost unusable in many many applications.
Anything that moves with slightly faster than normal speed is almost impossible to focus on.
The lens just wont focus fast enough for real life applications, and that is very frustrating when you want to capture a moment in time.
As far a build quality, this lens lacks nothing, as far as sharpness and bokeh, it is second only to the MKII version.
But as far as focus speed, I found more winners focussing manually.
I have since upgraded to the MKII version and it is a 10 out of 10.
I think Canon tried very hard with this first version of this lens , but maybe should have left it as a manual focus lens, then at least the expectations were realistic. Apart from that its a 9 out of 10 in all other areas.


 
Canon EOS 40D

40d
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,800.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: file quality, speed 6.5 frames/sec
Cons:
none yet

purchased this as a second body(to my 1DmkIIN), but I LOVE it. Have used it for motorsports, portrature and weddings...spot on little unit.
WELL DONE CANON. thinking of buying another as a second body to this one.


 
Canon EOS 1D Mark II N

1d_mkii_n
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $5,500.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: it just works, and it works well.
Cons:
battery weight.

I have had the 1D, 1DmkII, 1DmkIII and the IIN, this is my favourtie.
Its a gun of camera. Focusses very well and performs flawlessly.
Definite keeper.


 
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

ef70-200_28lisu_1_
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,500.00 | Rating: 5 

 
Pros: IS
Cons:
heavy, soft at 2.8

not happy at all with this lens. The non IS performs and balances so much better...dissapointed.

 
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

ef70_200_28_1_
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: sharp sharp ...didi I say sharp?
Cons:
none

best zoom lens I have ever had. Sharp from 2.8 up. takes converters very well, even the 2x. I have had 3 copies of this lens over the past 8 years..all have been spot on.

 
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

ef_24-70_28u_1_
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,980.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: sharp @ f2.8, great colours
Cons:
bit heavy

have had this lens now for two years , its a bread and butter lens, very sharp and versatile. love it.

 
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM

16-35II
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,200.00 | Rating: 5 

 
Pros:
Cons:

improved in some areas over the original, however at f2.8, the original is sharper..very dissapointed.

 
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

ef_16-35_28_1_
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,900.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: sharpness at f2.8, weight.
Cons:
price

came from a 17-40 to this lens, similar charachetristics, however this lens just has the edge at compareable aperatures.

 
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

ef85mmf_18usm_1_
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $670.00 | Rating: 5 

 
Pros: compared to the 1.2 version its quite good/sharp
Cons:
misses focus quite a bit at 1.8

good lens but not at pro levels. CA plus not focussing accurately is where this lens is let down.

 
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

85II
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,500.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: better than version I in every area.
Cons:
weight,

you get what you pay for. The contrast and colur control are excellent. I dont use a lens hood with this lens and the flare control is amazing..well done Canon

 
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L USM

ef85mmf_12_1_
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 5 

 
Pros:
Cons:



 
Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM

ef_35_14_1_
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,890.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: brilliant at f1.4, lovely bokeh
Cons:
price..

best 35mm I have used, I compare it very closely to my zeiss 35mm.
lovely.


 

Page:  1 · 2 · 3  next