about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: Psilonaught  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Psilonaught to your Buddy List
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

70-300_isusm
Review Date: Jan 20, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: Superb value for money Sharp IS works a very well Light travel lens
Cons:
Not L build (half the price) IS is noisy Needs slightly fragile

Price is excellent considering the IQ, IS works very well indeed, although it's noisy compared to that on my 24-105 L.

Due to the plastic constuction the lens is very light, and I have yet to require a mono/tripod whils shooting at 300mm.

PQ is sharp, even wide open, and 99% of the wildlife images I took on the trip i took to the Galapapos came out superbly, with nice bokeh at F4.

Noisy compared to my 24-104, and USM motor not as accurate/fast. Build isn't great, don't drop it!

Some samples
http://images.fotopic.net/original/ylihcr.jpg
http://images.fotopic.net/original/ylx367.jpg
http://images.fotopic.net/original/ylx36x.jpg


 
Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM

111_small
Review Date: May 26, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 5 

Pros: Cost and Size, nothing else really.
Cons:
not sharp, lacking in detail. Blurred right hand side on all images.

I bought this instead of the Canon 10-22mm to save some money but boy was i disappointed! Pictures produced with this lens were very soft, and the lack if detail at 100% was shocking. The right hand side of all photos was very blurry as well.

I would not recommend this lens. I ended up buying the Canon 10-22 in the US, saving 100 and it's superb, way way sharper than the Sigma.


 
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

24-105lisusm
Review Date: Apr 23, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Clarify, Sharpness and good zoom range (especially on 1.6 DSRL). Almost the perfect walk-around lens
Cons:
Weight. Serious landscapers not using a FF dSLR will require a wider lens in the kit bag to compensate for the 24mm low end

Having used a 17-85mm IS USM for 6 months I was starting to wonder if I would ever see sharp images on my 350D

Having spend an eternity deciding what to replace it with I finally decided to cough up the $$$ and buy the 24-105. It also has IS which was something I wasn't prepared to lose, and works exceptionally well

For me the longer bottom end compared to the 17-85 is more than compensated by the sharp, sharp and detailed images. The long end is quite decent too.

Add a decent ultra wide angle and you have a very very good walk-around kit bag with only 2 lenses.


 
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM

EF17-85
Review Date: Jan 3, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Excellent travel lens, very good clarity and sharpness, little distortion at 17mm, Image Stablizer is a god send and works amazingly well
Cons:
costly and quite heavy. IS does drain the battery. Zoom ring a bit loose and plasticy

I consider this one of the best travel lenses around, and will not be buying any further lenses since this gives me everything I need. Eveb with the 1.6x Canon crop factor, 17mm is more than wide enough for landscape/architectural photography, and and I can live with 85mm zoom.

Image Stabalizer is some dark magic - I have no idea how it works but it does the job astoundingly well, and have taken photos at 1/10 of a second ISO100 and they are still razor sharp.

Both myself and friends have been amazed by the detail and sharpness of this lens - it's just superb.

Hopefully Canon will emulate Nikon and try to build a 17-200 IS USM version!!