Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: jcw1982  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add jcw1982 to your Buddy List
Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF]

Review Date: Nov 14, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: nice build, sharpness, good color and contrast, price
none really

I had pretty much stayed away from wide zooms, the Canons I could afford didn't impress me much, and a couple third-party lenses I had tried left much to be desired. I was using wide primes, a 24 and a 35 before deciding to give this lens a try, thanks mainly to the good reviews it had gotten here on FM.
After owning for awhile, I have to admit I like it. The lens has a nice build to it; to zoom ring is nice and firm with no play in it. The focus ring is smooth, and has a very short "throw"-going from infinity to the closest focusing distance with only a slight turn of the ring. It does not have internal zooming so the lens does get longer when zoomed out to 50mm but not too bad. The included lens hood attaches firmly and locks into place.
Some have mentioned the lack of USM on this lens and the noise of the motor. It is a little noiser than Canon USM lenses, but quieter than Canon-made lenses without USM from my experience. Also, the short throw of the focus ring when focusing means the motor isn't required as much when subject distances change.
Comparing the images from the Tamron to other Canon lenses I have owned/used(17-40, 20-35, 28-105, 24, 35) I find the Tamron images comparable, and in a couple cases superior. For the price of the lens and the performance I have seen from mine, I am glad I bought it and have no regrets picking it over the Canon product.

Canon EF 24mm f/2.8

Review Date: Feb 28, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $230.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: a very sharp lens, light-weight, compact, low price, very unobtrusive, beuild is alot better than I expected

I recently moved back to primes after trying several zooms-Canons and others. While it may not be for everyone, there isn't too much I don't like about using prime lenses such as this one. The 24 2.8 by Canon is a great lens for the money. I don't mean that since it is priced low, that makes up for mediocre quality, I mean you get alot of quality for the money. Some may complain it doesn't have USM, and that was a concern of mine at first, but with a small, light-weight wide-angle lens such as this, it really isn't that big of a deal. I also found the build quality to be very good-maybe not up there with the "L"s, but plenty rugged enough. The lens works well for the type of shooting I do, both digital and film, and the added speed over some zooms is an important shooting characteristic for me. I know there are some zooms with this kind of speed, but their size and expense makes them less disable for myself. I also posted a similar review about the Canon 35 f2, combined with the 24 2.8 they make a good combination that won't break the bank, are light , take up little space, are relatively fast, and most importantly are cabable of sharp, contrasty, photographs.

Canon EF 35mm f/2

Review Date: Feb 22, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: small, light-weight, SHARP, price is right

After going back and forth with a variety of zooms---Canons' and others, I decided to give wide primes a try. I have not been disappointed with this lens. For me it is ideal: faster than many zooms, small, light-weight, compact, close focusing, and very sharp. If there is anything "con" about this lens it would be it doesn't have USM, but I knew this before I bought it so that is a non-factor. Some have questioned the build-quality, but I have no complaints.

Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG APO MACRO HSM

Review Date: Aug 6, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $889.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: nice build, good finish, overall very well made
lens cap, would not focus

I bought this lens after debating Canon-Sigma for a long time. When I got the lens I was very happy with it........until I placed it on my camera. It focused one time and that was it. I tried numerous things trying to get it working--changed camera batteries, took lens off and put it back on, cleaned contacts, put it on a different camera body, etc, etc. Not only did the autofocus not work, the manual focus mode was out also. Sent lens back for refund.

Canon EF 20-35mm f/2.8L

Review Date: Dec 26, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: good build quality, sharp, pleasing zoom range, nice price.
none for the price.

I bought this lens used and have been quiet pleased with it. I don't believe the focus speeds(which seem plenty fast enough to me) are really an issue with a wide angle lens, likewise the overall speed of the lens itself. No, it isn't a fast "L" lens, but it never claimed it was. And I didn't pay the price of an "L" lens.