Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: mark1958  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add mark1958 to your Buddy List
Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM

Review Date: Apr 2, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 6 

Pros: Relative Lightweight
lack of sharpness cost!

I was excited about this lens and really was looking forward to getting it and selling my 300/2.8L IS. However, I must admit I was disappointed. I did a number of comparison shots (inside and outside) with the 400 DO vs 300/2.8L IS with the 1.4x TC. I compared the shots on a tripod and a few hand held ones. In all of my comparisons, the 300 plus TC resulted in sharper and more contrasty images. While the 400 is lighter, it is not a small or lightweight lens. Therefore, it was not an easy lens to carry around for long periods. I personally believe this lens is over priced for the quality. If the lens was in the 2500 dollar range, I think it would be a reasonable value. Nonetheless, in the end I returned the DO lens.

Update: Based on other posts related to "sharper" copies, I did get a new copy to try and was impressed. While still not as sharp as the 300+TC, it was much much closer and overall the optics on the new lens was night vs day compared to my old one. As a result I am keeping this one and sold my 300/2.8L IS. I think there are others who have found many of the older DO lenses to have QC issues but I can say that the one i have is really decent and a keeper.

Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L USM

Review Date: Apr 2, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,350.00 | Rating: 6 

Pros: Very wide --- sturdy build
Some CA sharpness lacking on the edges

I think if you need a really wide angle lens this would be it. However, I found the 16-35 to be equally as sharp and the colors and contrast to be very similar at 16mm. The trade offs are the zoom vs extra 2mm. For me the zoom was much more valuable. I suspect if i was shooting interiors often I would have kept this lens but in the end, I sold it.