Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: lb311  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add lb311 to your Buddy List
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Review Date: Sep 5, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $800.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Essential wide-angle for 1.6x cameras; L-like performance.

This lens is spectacular on a 20D or Rebel. Hard to tell it apart from an L-series in terms of color saturation and sharpness.

I love to use it to distort foregrounds and with landscapes. Sometimes, I do wish it had a bit more length than 22mm (i.e. a 24 or 28 would have been ideal), but you can always switch to a longer lens for that range, whereas there's nothing else available for ultra-wide work on a 1.6x camera.

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

Review Date: Sep 5, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,350.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Beautiful contrast and color; IS provides good handheld results, even zoomed!
The push-pull zoom; Can be a dust magnet;.

I traded a Tamron 200-500 for this lens and have never looked back. This lens absolutely can't be beat for fast-moving situations that require hand-holding a telephoto. If you shoot wildlife or sports, you will likely "get the shot" with this lens versus those that don't have IS and L glass. The color saturation and sharpness are simply unmatched for zooms in this range.

While I didn't really believe the debate about whether or not the push-pull mechanism. attracts dust, after using this lens a short while, I started seeing much more dust on my sensor than I'd ever seen before, so true or not, the zoom mechanism does seem to attract dust.

Still, I wouldn't be without this lens. Absolutely love it!

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

Review Date: Sep 5, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $395.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: very capable lens with IS; Better quality than other mid-ranged EF zooms; nicely priced.
wish it were a bit wider.

I currently use this as my main walk-around lens and have had pretty good results with it, but my 10-22S and 100-400L lenses seem just a bit better in terms of color saturation and sharpness. On my 20D (at 1.6x crop), this lens is a bit too tele for mid-ranged landscapes and I find I'm often having to switch to the 10-22 to try and capture a better wide angle.

Now that the 24-105L has been announced, I'm sure this lens will lose favor as that lens will undoubtedly fill the gap between wide angles and the 100-400L a bit better. But up until now, the 28-135 has been the best choice out there for a walk-around zoom.

Canon TS-E 90mm f/2.8

Review Date: Sep 5, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: View camera-like effects; great for panos & products; accepts a tele-converter.
limitations when used with the 20D (& probably the Rebel XT).

This is a very versatile lens with good color and sharpness, but beware of some pretty big limitations if used with a 20D or Rebel XT. These bodies utilize a mirror box that is smaller than other Canon bodies, so any time the lens is shifted up (towards the viewfinder), vignetting will occur along the bottom of the frame due to mirrorbox cutoff. This makes vertically-framed panoramas essentially impossible on these bodies. Additionally, exposures of pano left or right frames is much more distorted and unreliable (even if shot with manual settings).

Surprisingly, I've found much better results using this lens with my old Digital Rebel (300D) body than with the 20D-- no mirrorbox cutoff and much more consistent exposure across all pano frames. I'm hoping the results will be equally as positive when I upgrade to a 1-series body.