Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: eyebelieve  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add eyebelieve to your Buddy List
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

Review Date: May 24, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $75.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: sharpness, lightweight, price, price, price, sweet bokeh, great anywhere past f/4 and gives pretty good photos anywhere below that, very workable in low light,
difficult manual focus ring, AF hunting, odd AF/MF switch, odd focal length on a APS-C

There's really nothing bad you can say about it, all its faults can be attributed to be the less than $80 price tag.

For what its worth, the lens packs a punch. Really good for portraits, bokeh works well, and the one of the most portable lenses on the market.
I bring this lens everywhere, because I can. It really doesn't have any downfalls for the price.

Sigma 28-300 f3.5-6.3 Macro

Review Date: Apr 26, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: $220.00 | Rating: 3 

Pros: Long Range for its price, "all-in-one" lens
SOFT, tries to do too much for it's low budget nature, lens extends when being carried around, heavy, autofocus hunting

Well, I unfortunately opted to get this lens a while back instead of a stock lens with 350d. This probably was a mistake, but I wasn't expecting much from my first lens anyways. Nevertheless, I wasn't ever surprised with this lens, and always seemed under ever single good shooting condition possible to come up with soft pics. Even when jacking up the ISO, speeding up the shutter and keeping the zoom on the 35-50mm range this lens still produced soft images. To all new camera users who are looking for a better lens to upgrade your stock lens from, THIS IS NOT IT.

For a better alternative to your stock lens, get the Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM. I sold the Sigma and bought this lens, and needless to say it is a huge improvement. It doesn't have the range that the 28-300 does, but the improved sharpness and quality is well worth it. If you do need the range, and want a high quality picture, Canon also make an L-series 70-200mm which I have used and highly recommend.

I can't say I have used the Sigma 28-300 on another camera of any sort, which it very well may perform better on.