Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: jimnms  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add jimnms to your Buddy List
Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

Review Date: Dec 9, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $410.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Good Price, IS, quiet, fast focus, size and weight
28mm not wide enough on a 1.6 crop DSLR

This was the first lens I bought when I got my 10D. If I can only take one lens with me, this is the one that I take.

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

Review Date: Dec 9, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $415.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Good zoom range, IS, good lens for the money.
AF kind of slow, the AF will sometimes hunt or misfocus.

I bought this lens 9 months ago at the same time I bought my 10D. I've had mostly good times with this lens, but missed a few shots because of the slow AF or the occasional misfocus. I find that after half pressing and getting a focus lock, if you release and half press again the focus will be right on.

I recently purchased a 70-200 f/4L, but I've kept the 75-300 IS. I still use it sometimes when I know I'll need the extra 100mm or the IS.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

Review Date: Dec 9, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $540.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Build quality, fixed apperture, great price & exelent image quality, light weight, and what everyone else has already said.

I purchased this lens from jgbryan021900 on the Buy/Sell Forum here.

I have the Canon 75-300 IS, and I was nervous about not having IS and losing 100mm of zoom at first. The 70-200 2.8 IS cost and weighed too much for me to even consider.

I love this lens. I took it to an airshow a few weeks after I got it. It was dark and overcast, but this lens still pumped out some excelent images.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

Review Date: Dec 9, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $640.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Perfect lens for a 1.6 crop DSLR, sharp, quiet, good build quality, good price for an L lens
Nothing to complain about yet.

I purchased this lens from jgbryan021900 in the Buy/Sell Forums here.

Until now I've mainly shot telephoto. I had purchased a Sigma 18-50 for the occasional wide shot. I found myself using the 18-50 more often, so I dicided to take the plunge and get the 17-40 f/4L.

This has become my favorite lens so far, and I've found myself shooting wide shots more often now. When testing it the day it arrived, I tried hard to get it to flare, but I could only manage one shot with a tiny little flare that's hardly noticable. I've only noticed a slight bit of CA on extreme shots in the corner.

I took it to an airshow a few weeks after I got it, and I was extremely pleased with the results.

Sigma 18-50mm F3.5-5.6 DC

Review Date: Oct 12, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $110.00 | Rating: 6 

Pros: Cheap, small, lightweight
AF in low light, the MF and zoom rings are backwards from Canon lenses

I bought this lens for my 10D for a cheap wide angle lens since I mostly shoot telephoto. It's served it's purpose well, and I'm about to replace it with a Canon 17-40 f/4L.

The AF motor is a little loud, but that doesn't bother me. It's not superfast AF, but it's not that slow either.

As some have already mentioned, you need to remember to switch to MF before attaching/detaching the lens to the camera so you don't accidentally turn the focus ring.

I think most of the people that give this lens a bad review are expecting way too much out of a ~$100 lens. Wink