about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: ThomasGermany  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ThomasGermany to your Buddy List
Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM

Screen_Shot_2014-07-21_at_8_05_15_PM_copy
Review Date: Jun 26, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp, even on the edge and wide open. Good to handle. I am more than happy with this lens
Cons:
Cant find any

I already got mine and tested it. I am very satisfied, Image quality is definitely L-Level! The Pictures are sharp, and i dont see any Problems, even on the edge and wide open. This lens is definitely better than the 17-40L.
Build Quality ist like other L`s very good.
In the meantime I got the chance to use it in the arctic. Perfect Picture quility with the 5mk3. I would buy it again any time....


 
Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM 1.4x Extender

Screen_Shot_2013-09-10_at_2_10_26_PM
Review Date: Sep 20, 2013 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: very fast AI, in combination with crop (7D) a very strong tele, Quality of the Pictures is great!!
Cons:
Price, Price.... not so easy to handle

Had the chance to test this lens, because I wanted to take it on a journey to South Georgia. Planned to take photos of albatross (freehand). For this purpose I cannot use this lens. I was not very successful in gettig pictures of model airplanes (my albatross substitute) when using the converter switched on. Not quite surprising it is extremely difficult to find the object. It is very difficult to quickly handle the zoom (turn) in combination with the weight.
Without the converter everything was fine, the pictures perfect! But considering the price (rent) and transportation problems (how to take it into the aircraft?) I will take my 100-400L. Push and pull has advantages (in handling).


 
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM

EF17-85
Review Date: Jun 21, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 1 

 
Pros: did not find anything
Cons:
the kit-lens is much better

I tested it a whole weekend and I did not find any argument for this lens -despite the range, but a good range with poor images is not my idea. The kit lens EF-S 18-55 is defintely better: sharper and less distortions when wide open. I would not barter my kit-lens, not even for nothing.

If You really want an extremely good lens take a look at EF-S 17-55 2.8, but dont spoil Your money for the EF-S 17-85.


 
Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM

l217_efs1755
Review Date: Jun 18, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp, shows perfect details, little distortion when wide open, fast focus, 2.8
Cons:
Pricey, heavy

I tested it a whole weekend and compared it with EFS 17-85 and the kid lense EFS 18-55.
EFS 17-85 is terrible bad, worse than the kid lense!
The 17-55 2.8 is much better than the kid lens. It is much sharper and shows more details. But is it worth the difference?!? And it is heavy, especially when considering mountain hiking!