Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: musicjohn  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add musicjohn to your Buddy List
Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM

Review Date: Jan 4, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharpness, contrast, IS, FTM focus... did I mention sharpness?
Only EF-S fitting

@ mlade10

You want your head checked out by a doctor? Giving it a rating 1 !!! Man, you are sick.

I have ownes this lens now for two months. I also have a 70-200 f/2.8 "L" and a 24-105 f/4 "L" and previously owned the 200mm f/2.8 "L" prime and 17-40 f/4 "L"

This new lil' beauty optically outperformes ANY lens, "L' or not "L", prime or zoom.

The new generation image stabiliser has made it possible for me to shoot at 1/13 of a second without a tripod and still have razor-sharp images. With any "non-IS" lens I need at least 1/80 sec. for a sharp image.

Only negative point is the EF-S fitting. Sometime in the future I will want to go full-frame (maybe the new 1D mk III in february?) and this lens will not fit. Sad, because for full-frame there is NO equivelant lens as yet. The 17-40 f/4 "L" just isn't a match for this new 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM. Good thing is... I'll keep my current 30D as a 2nd body, so this lens is a stayer.

I can HIGHLY recommend this lens to anyone seeking "L" optical quality (and beyond).

In my view this alone justifies it's relatively high price.

Sigma 24-70mm f3.5-5.6 Aspherical HF

Review Date: Nov 16, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharpness, weight, construction, price

I got this lens after reading all of the reviews here. It was meant to cover the gap between the sale of my Canon EOS 350D kit-lens (18-55mm rubbish-lens) and the delivery of my Canon 17-40mm "L" and my Canon 24-105mm "L" lenses.

Wow, was I amased at the quality of the pictures I shot. Actually, from the first day I got the Canon EOS 350D (Digital Rebel in the States?) I was extremely disappointed with the pictures that I shot using the 18-55mm II kit-lens. As a matter of fact, at one stage I considered selling my 350D again, that's how bad it was. All results were soft, unsharp, no contrast, defenition and color.

So then I got this little Sigma beauty. Well, a whole new world opened up for me. All shots I took from the first day I got this lens are keepers. Razor-sharp, lots of detail, contrast and color, at all appertures.

Recently my Canon 17-40mm "L" and 24-105mm "L" have arrived. They are fantastic lenses too. But I can honestly say that the Sigma 24-70 is AS SHARP as both "L" lenses, and only at 1/10 of the price. I even dare say that the Sigma is a tat sharper wide open (f/3.5) than the 24-105 "L" at f/4.

Now I have decided not to part with my little Sigma lens and keep it as a "spare" just in case anything happens to one of my "L" lenses.

This one is an absolute winner, and I can recommend it to anyone who wants extremely good results at the price of a shopping-car full of groceries !!!

I will be setting up a gallery soon with sample pictures which I shot with this lens, so you can all see for yourself. I'll keep you informed.


Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

Review Date: Nov 16, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Great lens. Very sharp, even at f/4

I've owned this lens now for a month, and I have never seen such sharp pictures come rolling out of my memorycards.

The Image Stabiliser is a great feature when lighting conditions are far from optimal.

The lens isn't cheap, but definately worth every penny. Works very well on my EOS 350D

For sample pictures you can look at my homepage:

and click on the button "Foto's" or Fotoshows" on the left hand side menu.

I could definately recommend this lens to anyone who seeks a great, sharp, contrasty and true-color lens.