Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Pancake
|
|
Review Date: Jan 4, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, cheap, sharp, quiet focusing
|
|
Cons:
|
Not as small as I'd expected, slow focusing, only f2.8
|
|
|
The Canon 'pancake' is really more of a shrunken standard lens, it is't acually that slim, not that it matters, it's a very good sharp lens for the price with good contrast. The new focusing system isn't great on a full frame camera but it's accurate.
It's a very nice focal length on FF though, very versatile. I like the lens a lot.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
|
|
Review Date: Nov 8, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $3,100.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Build, image quality, features, dual cards, LCD, focusing system, customization, 2-way level, improved shape for holding, almost everything
|
|
Cons:
|
Awkward way of zooming in review and liveview, too expensive at launch (better now), few extra pixels over the 5DII
|
|
|
Simply a fantastic camera, a real upgrade to the 5DII in speed, AF, features, LCD screen, build, weatherproofing, dual card slots - everything really.
Very similar in use to the 7D the 5DIII has moved the 5 series on by a huge amount, this feels like a very modern product.
A bit overshadowed by the D800 it would have been nice to have more pixels than the 5DII, 1 meg makes very little IQ difference at low and medium ISO's
If you are on the fence and have a 5DII it is worth the upgrade in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EOS 7D
|
|
Review Date: Jun 26, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Very well designed, fast in use, 8FPS, lovely LCD, video, Solid build, pop-up flash, remote flash control, very customisable
|
|
Cons:
|
Image quality not quite there yet, no better than 550D. Not bad but noisy if files are manipulated much - needs good exposure. Would much prefer 5 Frames Per Second option rather than just 8 or 3. Focusing system effective if over-complex. Only 3 frames auto-bracketing and then only 3 stops, why not more in a semi-pro model?
|
|
|
This is a good, but not great camera.
The IQ is essentially exactly the same as my 550D so I knew what I was getting, the body is vastly superior, well built and very fast in use with a lovely LCD. The lack of dual card slots is a shame.
The RAW files tend to fall apart very easily with post processing, noise becomes a problem much more quickly than with my full frame Canons.
I would also much prefer a 5FPS option than just 8 or 3 with nothing in-between, how hard would that have been Canon?
Some of the button-press combinations needed to register AF points are absurd, including pressing the light switch! Far too complex. However being able to set different points in horizontal and vertical orientation is excellent and useful.
The AF system always gets it wrong when the camera chooses the AF point, it ALWAYS goes for the nearest thing, this is confusing a lot of people. Much better just to pick one AF point, which is a shame at this level of camera.
There's no doubt this is the best of the current Canon APS-C cameras and Canon have seen fit to include this sensor in all their new APS-C models, so it's now been in the 7D, 550D, 600D, 650D and 60D, so Canon feel it's good enough. It's nowhere near as good as a 5DII sensor though, not even close.
All in all, I'm a bit underwhelmed. It's good but it's not great. But then I got mine cheap.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EOS 5D
|
|
Review Date: Jun 14, 2012
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Class-leading image quality even in 2012. Just great digital files (using RAW)
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow, clunky body, slow FPS, no sensor cleaning, no live view, no video, not 100% viewfinder, average focusing system (centre point only in reality), poor LCD, old-fashioned menus, no weathersealing.
|
|
|
An update to my first 5D review from 2005 (I think).
I've owned three of these over the years partly all at the same time, they are just fantastic digital cameras.
Don't expect to be spoiled though (which is a good thing) you actually have to set your own ISO (which is perfectly usable up to 1600 ISO with correct exposure and noise free at 800), you really have to use manual focusing or the centre AF point, I don't trust the others.
But it takes great pictures with a very convenient file size and no fuss. I've never had one fail.
It's a classic for a reason, it's supremely good at it's basic purpose, taking pictures. Use RAW and your brain and you won't be disappointed.
|
|
|
|
|
Tamron AF 28-75MM F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
|
|
Review Date: May 2, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, good contrast, useful range on full frame, constant f2.8 max aperture, comes with a hood
|
|
Cons:
|
No full time focusing, no 24mm at the wide end, no image stabilisation, buzzy AF motor, extends quite a lot
|
|
|
I'm not sure why there are two Tamron 28-75mm lenses listed here in the reviews as I think they are actually the same lens.
My copy was bought used and is really very good. I use it on a 5D and 5DII and it's sharp, light and reliable.
I've mentioned that it's buzzy and doesn't have full time focusing but the IQ is the important thing and that's surprisingly good.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
|
|
Review Date: May 25, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Light weight, good image quality, excellent image stabilisation
|
|
Cons:
|
It's white, it's too expensive, it's f4 (but that's why it's small). It doesn't come with a tripod collar.
|
|
|
This is a very good lens. It's not quite the earth-shattering experience I was expecting, but it's very sharp throughout the range has excellent contrast and is nice and small.
Is it worth twice the cost of a 70-300IS ? Well it isn't twice as good, although it's better so that's a matter of opinion but I'd say no.
I'm not exactly disappointed, I'm just not overwhelmed.
|
|
|
|
|
Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM
|
|
Review Date: Apr 6, 2011
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
Reasonably well built.
|
|
Cons:
|
Everything else. Soft, heavy, expensive for what it is
|
|
|
I wanted to love this and use it as a general purpose lens, but it's VERY soft, much heavier than it's non-OS predecessor and expensive for what it is.
Maybe I got a bad one (which seems to happen a bit too much to me with Sigma lenses).
Steer clear.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS
|
|
Review Date: Feb 25, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Quite sharp, very cheap, very light, decent IS
|
|
Cons:
|
Not very well made, no full time manual focus, slow
|
|
|
Bought one of these very cheap and it has surprised me, it's quite sharp and has quite good contrast. It certainly does what it's supposed to do pretty well.
Much better than I expected, without being stunning.
|
|
|
|
|
Sigma 12-24 f4.5-5.6 EX DG Aspherical HSM
|
|
Review Date: Feb 7, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Very wide on full frame, sharp when stopped down, well built, quite inexpensive for the widest non-fisheye available, decent contrast. Remarkably distortion free if kept upright
|
|
Cons:
|
Very slow at f4.5-f5.6, dreadfully soft at wider apertures, some CA, needs a tripod and liveview to get the best out of it - needs using like a large format lens really
|
|
|
Bought one used, mint.
Astonishingly wide but this is a lens that begs to be used on a tripod and stopped well down, to f11 at least, if not further, where it does shine with some great results.
It's just too slow for general hand-held use (which is not what it's really designed for).
It's very well built and comes with the built-in hood and a nice case.
It's a niche lens - landscapes and interiors - and for that it's really very good. For anything much else I've had some horrid results, especially handheld, perhaps IS would help.
I certainly don't regret the purchase, with it being less than a third the price of the Canon 14mm L.
It does it's job well, but that job is fairly limited
|
|
|
|
|
Canon Rebel T2i DSLR
|
|
Review Date: Jun 18, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $725.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Small size, brilliant image quality, speed of use, all the functions you could ever need
|
|
Cons:
|
Needs good lenses
|
|
|
This purchase was as an upgrade to my much-loved 450D, which I used on holiday and as a light-weight companion.
In the few years since the 450D came out things really have moved on, this new camera is a joy.
Fantastic image quality (for a cropped sensor) combined with a superb LCD rear screen, a Q button so you can now change settings on the rear and much better focusing and exposure.
Live view focusing is now very fast and the menu design is vastly improved
I understand it shoots video too, which I will never use
Although it's still rather overpriced over here it's a superb piece of kit if you want a small bodied dslr.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 28mm f/2.8
|
|
Review Date: Apr 22, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Size, price, performance
|
|
Cons:
|
Build, no full time focusing
|
|
|
Very underrated lens.
Nothing spectacular, just a good all-rounder for a very cheap price.
A very handy length on crop cameras.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EOS 5D Mark II
|
|
Review Date: May 12, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,925.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, viewfinder, image quality, small size, LCD screen, almost everything.
|
|
Cons:
|
Tragically old focusing system was a mistake at this price, just not good enough. Hugely expensive batteries. Movie mode, ugh.
|
|
|
Too expensive, but then again what camera isn't (especially in the UK), this is a terrific camera producing simply wonderful files. It's a massive upgrade to the 5D and really shows an extra few years development.
It is badly let down by an average focusing system that can (once again) only truly rely on the centre AF point. Not good enough on a new pro camera. In fact nowhere near good enough.
Also the ghastly movie mode. Why? Don't want it, don't like it, won't ever use it. If I wanted a video camera I'd buy one. Cheapens the whole thing for me. Gimmicky, poorly implemented and incongruous on a pro stills camera.
I can imagine this being the absolute darling of the wedding pro's.
However, all in all a very good camera with one or two limitations. The RAW files are simply as good as or better than my 1Ds3 and that is really saying something.
Canon missed a trick not making this a '3D' with a 45 point AF though. Big error.
|
|
|
|
|
Tokina AT-X 124 AF PRO DX 12-24mm f/4
|
|
Review Date: May 12, 2009
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, clutch for manual focusing, price
|
|
Cons:
|
Average image quality, hideous chromatic abberations at 12mm (even at f8-f9), innacurate focusing
|
|
|
Not nearly as good as I was expecting. Indeed I even sent it back for calibration and testing as I didn't think it could be supposed to be this average. The lab said it was 'within tolerances'. Not impressed.
Nicely built and relatively cheap and the push-pull manual focusing works well, but not properly sharp at any focal length and with simply awful chromatic abberations at 12mm, even at the best apertures.
A big disappointment.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EOS 50D
|
|
Review Date: Apr 2, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
15 meg sensor, nice LCD, very fast in use, takes 20D/30D/40D batteries, charger and grip and 40D focusing screens, 14 bit RAW files, well built, nice to hold, lots to like really
|
|
Cons:
|
Still a fairly modest viewfinder, big files (but you should know that when you buy a 15 meg camera!) quite expensive. Canon finally give us proper gridlines in liveview and they are so thick you can hardly see through them, daft!
|
|
|
A typical, efficient modern Canon dslr. A proper upgrade to the already very good 40D. I haven't found any of the image quality issues flying around the web, just large, well detailed files and a very fast-in-use camera whose body didn't need redesigning from the 40D, it was good already. Much nicer to look at the the current Nikons I think, not that that matters.
Quite why people complain about the size of the files I don't know - it's a 15 meg camera, it's going to have big files! Good ones too.
I have no hesitation in giving this a high mark, it's a fast, versatile, well built camera whose price will. I hope come down a bit in due course.
I assume the 60D will add movie modes but hopefully no more pixels.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EOS 40D
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EOS 40D
|
|
Review Date: Nov 18, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $650.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Current price, build, speed, LCD, big viewfinder, 14 bit RAW, my menu, grip, silver hotshoe, ISO in viewfinder, interchangeable screens, pretty much everything
|
|
Cons:
|
Incompatibility with Sandisk Extreme III 4GB cards
|
|
|
This is just a fantastic camera, especially for the now reduced price (thanks to the only marginally improved 50D). I paid less than half what I paid for my 10D and 20D. Outstanding value.
It is fast, beautifully made, has a much improved viewfinder over the 20/30D, weatherproofing, frames-per-second, menu options, I could go on and on.
The 10 meg sensor is very marginally inferior to the one in the 450D/Xsi, but the focusing system is so much better it makes up for it. The overall image quality is superb, especially in RAW.
In years to come cameras like the 40D, 450D/Xsi and 5D will be the markers by which others are judged. It's a great camera. It has no real weaknesses in any area apart from the odd issue with the Sandisk card, which is half a camera issue and half a card processor issue. If you know about it you needn't worry.
Get one cheap while they're still here
|
|
|
|
|
|
