Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: Sanderman  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Sanderman to your Buddy List
Canon EF 24mm f/2.8

Review Date: Feb 16, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $300.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Very sharp, light, rapid focus
Some vignetting and slight softness wide open at the corners on FF but not bad at all

This lens is a gem. I use it primarily outdoors for landscapes. It's so small and light it's almost like not having a lens on the camera. It very slightly beats my 35L (just back from Canon for calibration) for sharpness. Focus is very quick if a little noisy - it makes a brief buzz as it locks in and a small thunk at the ends of travel - but so what? At these prices how can you complain? A little CA in challenging high contast shots but all in all this is a fantastic little lens in absolute quality (not just for the money). If you don't need the low light indoor / small DOF capalilites of the 24 or 35 Ls this is not a significant step down in ultimate image quality. In case you can't tell, I love it. Above comments on a 5D.

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

Review Date: Jan 9, 2006 Recommend? | Price paid: $1,199.00

Pros: IS actually works pretty well. Solid build quality.
CA, purple fringing and otehr abberations on FF.

I tried this lens on my 5D and was extremely disappointed in its overall performance. Soft corners/edges, CA and rather severe purple fringing. It went back and I'm now using primes only on the body and the difference in overall picture quality is huge. I do not think this lens is suitable for a FF body unless you are extremely forgiving.

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

Review Date: Jan 8, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,199.00

Pros: Good AF, IS works as advertised.
Excessive distortions on FF cameras.

I tried this lens on my 5D and found it lacking in almost every respect. Soft overall, very soft in the corners and around the edges of the frame. Worse still was CA and purple fringing befitting a $400 5 MP point and shoot special. We're talking, tree branches with purple fringing as thick as the branches themselves! Add in extremely obvious vignetting and a bit of barrel distortion and it's difficult to fathom how this lens got classed as an L. To be fair, I would expect these defects to be far less apparent on small sensor cameras like the 20D or Rebel. But frankly, I feel this lens is simply not suitable for an FF camera like the 5D. I took it back and am buying nothing but primes for it instead.