Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: Peter Kwok  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Peter Kwok to your Buddy List
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Review Date: Jun 21, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharpness, low distortion, flare resistance, small size and light weight
CA & wide open soft corners. But all UWA have this problem

Excellent center sharpness, similar to my 17-40L, even wide open at f3.5 as seen here.
Corners are a bit soft and lower contrast when wide open. Not as good as my 17-40L, but improves greatly when stopped down to f5.6.
Distortion is surprisingly low for a UWA, even better than my 17-40L.
Chromatic aberration (CA) is the weakest link of the otherwise excellent lens, more than 1 pixel wide.
Excellent flare resistance. It is better than my 17-40L and a lot better than my 17-55 IS. I use the hood that came with the 17-40L, not to prevent flare, but to protect it from elbows in crowds.
I do not care for constant aperture. I rather have the extra 2/3 stop on the wide end where I use the most.
For those that complain about its costs higher than 3rd party lens from Sigma and Tokina, check out the price of Nikonís 12-24.
You can see my best photos taken with the 10-22mm here.

Tamron 28-105MM F/2.8 LD Aspherical (IF)

Review Date: Mar 1, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $750.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Good zoom range, f2.8, rugged built, 6 year warranty
82mm filter size, weight

I bought it in 1997 for my film Canon SLR. Optically, it is better than all my cheapo Canon consumer grade lens. After 5 years, its aperture motor broke. Tamron fixed it for free, including a complete cleaning.
One minor complain, although the 82mm lens cap feels solid, it falls apart when dropped. It is not easy to find all the pieces, including two tiny springs. Fortunately, Tamron sent me replacements.
However, with 1.6x crop D-SLR, it is not wide enough. Now, the 17-40L is my walk around lens.
You can see some samples at