about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: jamato8  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add jamato8 to your Buddy List
Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM

ef200_f2lisu_586x225_1_
Review Date: Mar 31, 2013 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $5,200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Extremely sharp, great IS, worth the money, built to work.
Cons:
None, I knew what I was getting into.

Pure excellence. This glass to me, is like my finest Leica glass. The 135L and the 200L are just superb performers. IS works fine with extension and with the latest tele 1.4 and 2 extenders, you get very good results.

This lens has traveled the world with me and will continue to do so. There is no substitute for me, not the 70-200 II, nothing. If you need what it does, it is waiting.

I bought this in 2010.


 
Canon Extender EF 2x II

Extender_2x2_1_
Review Date: Sep 20, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $298.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: I have the original Canon 2X, which worked well on my 180L but degraded my other lenses too much. The TC 2X II is for me, a big jump in image quality.
Cons:
None.

I couldn't be happier with this converter. I had expectations it would be better than my 2X I but I am getting almost no loss of image quality even wide open on my 200mm f2, which surprises me. The contrast, color saturation and snap are all there. I have zero reservations now in using my 200 as a 400 f4 with a 5 stop IS. Focusing slowed a bit but still remains fast enough for most subjects. Good show on this one Canon.

 
Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM

ef135mmf_2l_1_
Review Date: Aug 30, 2009 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: This lens is the only one I own that reminds me of my Leica lenses. I would not be without this one. It is great even for close-up with tubes and rivals my 180L or 60mm. Beautiful color and contrast round out this top performed that also doesn't kill you on the price.
Cons:
None.

My review is in my positive notes on this lens.

 
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM

16-35II
Review Date: Aug 27, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,520.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Build quality, superb contrast, color saturation, resolution and good feel.
Cons:
None at this time, well filter cost but like the lens that is a one time purchase, I hope.

Having used the 17-35L for a number of years I always desired just a little more sharpness, contrast and saturation. Something I mention in the positives of the 16-35II. In many applications for my work as a visual anthropologist and natural history photographer the 17-35 was fine for the job and from what I have seen mine appeared to be a sharp copy. I had also seen some of the great wide angle shots by the Nikon lens of this range and I realized more of this quality would be welcome.
Well the 16-35II has come through in spades and I am very happy to have one in my bag now.


 
Canon Speedlite Transmitter ST-E2

st-e2
Review Date: Jul 31, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Allows for field work that I could have never accomplished in the past.
Cons:
90 percent of the time it is accurate but not the other 10.

I have used this over the years having aquired it when first on the market and it has proved, most of the time, to be reliable and of great help in the field. I have used it in my visual anthropology and natural history photography with great success.

 
Canon EF 17-35mm f/2.8L USM

ef17_35_1_
Review Date: Sep 25, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: From about 20 up and at 3.5F up this lens is very, very sharp. At 35 and anywhere from F4 to f8 I have often confused it with my 35L, it is that sharp. This lens has served me in many situations for many years.
Cons:
a little soft at 17 but I remember this most of the time when shooting. Could have better weather sealing.

I find that on my 5D I get better results than I did on my 1v. Why I am not sure but I enjoy this lens and use it in conjunction with my 135L all of the time. I was caught in a heavy downpoor while doing some work in China and it took in more moisture than I thought it would. After a day in an airconditioned room, which dries the air, it was fine and the images continue to impress me. This was a good purchase and as mentioned above, this lens has served me well for many years.

 
Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM

ef135mmf_2l_1_
Review Date: Jan 8, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Rivals anything I have seen for sharpness. The contrast and color is something I wish all lenses possessed. When you use this lens, if the image is not sharp you can not blame the lens! I also enjoy the feel of the lens. If this were a Leica lens and cost 13 or 14 hundred I would be happy. That I can get this in Canon is excellent.
Cons:
Not a real gripe, well a little, but the focus is noisier than any L lens I have used and the lens rattles if you shake it. This is not a problem if you realize the lens is made this way. I thought something was wrong with mine but after receiving feedback on my post asking for opinions on this, I found out that it is just the way the lens is made.