Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: mjsutherland  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mjsutherland to your Buddy List
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

Review Date: Aug 22, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Excellent results

Overall a perfect lense. Being white it is very conspicuous but this is an advantage for some paying clients as it looks expensive, obviously a disadvantage if you are trying to be inconspicuous. Results are consistently outstanding. It is easier to make good telephotos like this and canon are particularly good at it ( unlike wider angles, I am not so full of praise for the 24-70 L 2.8 I have ) but still it is simply the best lense of this class I have ever used. I also have the 1.4 extender and it does not compromise results, making the lense more versatile.

Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX APO IF HSM

Review Date: Aug 22, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp, excellent results
Nil (perhaps build quality)

Overall excellent, I have since bought the canon 70-200 L 2.8 IS and apart from slight extra versatility in low light I would say the sigma gives as good results. I had a problem with the mounting ring coming loose from the lense which was a bit worrying, I just screwed it on again with a small phillips screwdriver ( 3 small screws hold it to the lense ) and it seems fine and didnt effect results. It feels good quality in your hands but I cant give it full marks on this as a new lense shouldn't start coming apart. Anyway recommended, a very good lense.

Tamron 14MM F/2.8 Aspherical (IF) SP AF

Review Date: Aug 2, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Nice and sharp,
Nil, perhaps lense hood (built in) could be bigger or it would be supplied with a bigger one to attach, the lense is vulnerable to damage and like any similar lense prone to flare.

I use a canon 20D with 1.6 crop and am impressed. I also have Canon 24-70 2.8L and 70-200 2.8L IS and it compares well with the 24-70. I was expecting less due to the extreme wide angle but with the 1.6 crop camera I am very impressed. Autofocus a bit slow and noisy compared to Canon USM but accurate. I always have great trepidation buying lenses as there seems to be great variation with copies including canon L series ( I am not 100% happy with sharpness of 24-70 2.8L at 900 ($1500 USD) )Recommended.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Review Date: Jun 14, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

Pros: Excellent build quality, feels solid and balanced on a 20D.

I was impressed with the build and handling. The colour saturation is also good and the Bokah nice and smooth. However I am disappointed in slight softness overall, especially wide open (not greatly improved stopped down). and at wide angles. I know it is a zoom lense with inherent compromises but was not as good as I expected and I will probably sell it for a 35 mm 1.4 L prime and a prime wide angle yet to be decided. I also have a 70-200 2.8 IS and that is a great lense and compares well to primes in its range but that is not the case with the 24-70. Perhaps I do not have a good example but sending the lense to Canon for recalibration seems to have little or no effect from other peoples experience.