Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: Qwntm  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Qwntm to your Buddy List
Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8G AF-S DX

Review Date: Mar 22, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,350.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fast, sharp, contrasty, lovely color, superb Bokeh, quick focusing, excellent construction, my main lens.
None! (Price? not really, this lens is worth every penny, just don't let Nikon know ;) )

This is the lens Canon really needs, and won't make because they are wasting their time with full frame sensors. This lens was one of the reasons I switched to Nikon. And it was worth it.

This lens is a joy to use and the image quality is superb. This is a "bread and Butter" pro lens, and is why pro's work looks like professional work.

When you finally realize that FF is not necesary and you're not going to shoot film again any time soon, this is the lens you must buy... resistance is futile! Smile


Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 XR Di Zoom AF

Review Date: Feb 20, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $250.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Image Quality, Price, Weight, Size, in that order.
Not USM focusing, Focus ring turns, No FTM focusing, lens extends while focusing.

The Image Quality is Canon L quality. That combined with the weight and size made it a must try lens. I try to stick to OEM lenses, but the Canon offering was too big and too heavy. For the price of this lens, I figured why not give it a try. Up against my SUPERB 17-40L, this lens is just about equal in terms of image quality. (I wish Canon would come out with a 17-55 2.8 EF-S L lens!)

Build quality is very high quality for it's price range, it competes with Canon's mid level, i.e. 24-85 USM. The Canon lens may handle better with USM and FTM focusing, but the Image Quality of the Tamron is L quality, so the trade off as I see it is sacrifice a little handleing smoothness for a 2.8 lens with L image quality. OK, fair enough...

This lens is so good, I wish I had tried the 17-35 2.8-4.0 before I bought the 17-40L.