about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: UltraVal  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add UltraVal to your Buddy List
Canon EF 28-105 F/3.5-4.5 II USM

ef_28-105_35
Review Date: Oct 2, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $140.00 | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: Quiet focusing USM, good build, colors, range
Cons:
Images seem soft, even stopped down

Maybe it's just my copy, I'm not sure, but I find this lens nothing to write home about. Most all pics I've taken with it seem so-so. I plan to continue to use it on occasion to hopefully determine whether it's a keeper or if I'll sell it.

 
Tamron 18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di II

18_200mm
Review Date: Sep 14, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $100.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Sharp, built VERY well, good feel, very nice colors
Cons:
Focusing in low light isn't easy with it but it can then be switched to MF

I feel this lens in under-rated here. All I know is that mine is very sharp, especially stopped down. I bought it mostly as a wide lens for outdoor use in daylight, and for this it's very good.

I do not think Sigma is built better - they are both built like tanks in my opinion.

I've also owned the Sigma 18-50 DC, 18-50 DC EX, and 17-70, all great lenses in my book, and the 18-50 DC is another under-rated lens in my opinion.

I've also owned Tamron 24-135, 28-105, 28-75 XR Di, and 70-300. The 18-200 and the 28-75 seem to be the best Tamrons I've used personally.

Am personally very pleased with it, and especially for $100.


 
Tokina 12-24mm f/4 AT-X 124 AF PRO DX SD

atx124afprodx
Review Date: Feb 17, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $435.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Best dSLR lens I've ever used. Great colors and sharp at most F stops.
Cons:
None really

This is a great lens. I sold mine because I can't really justify owning a lens worth this much. Instead I went for a bargain Tokina lens - the 19-35 "Plastic Fantastic".

I loved the color and image quality the 12-24 made on Canon bodies. Good glass really makes a big difference. I may possibly get another one of these some day and keep it. I don't think many people would be sorry for buying one of these.


 
Sigma 18-50mm F3.5-5.6 DC

18-50
Review Date: Nov 11, 2006 Recommend? | Price paid: $60.00

 
Pros: Pretty good lens. Fast AF. Built better than Canon EF-S 18-55.
Cons:
Soft on certain settings

This is a follow up on another review I wrote of this lens. If I could rate this lens again, it would be higher. I'd give this lens a 7. The comparison test I gave it with a Canon 18-55 may not have been a fair way to test it.

I've used this lens on many outdoors shots in sunny weather and got fairly good results.

I don't think it's a better lens than a Canon 18-55 EF-S lens but it's not a bad lens. the Canon seems to get a tad better IQ.



 
Sigma 18-50mm F3.5-5.6 DC

18-50
Review Date: Nov 8, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 2 

 
Pros: Built well; feels tougher than a Canon 18-55 kit lens
Cons:
Image quality is not good at all

I don't know if I got a "soft copy" of this lens or what but this lens I have is not a good one. I bought it based on reviews here and elsewhere that say it's better than a Canon kit lens. I compared the two yesterday, side by side and the Canon won by a longshot. The Canon was sharp. This lens is not, even when it's stopped down. My first experience with a Sigma lens was not a good one.