about | support

  Reviews by: oldshutterhand  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add oldshutterhand to your Buddy List
Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS HSM "A"

Review Date: Aug 30, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Excellent build quality, very good optical quality, versatility, constant aperture, effective stabilizer, silent ultrasonic Af with full time manual override
82mm filters, big and heavy (relative), vignetting, future compatibility is not granted

I checked the Nikon version on the Nikon d7000. Overall a very good lens, but not so good that the latest 18-35 or 35 f/4. Very usable at f/4 at both ends, but not tack sharp. CA is low, on Full frame vignetting is high. What is exceptional is the build quality, this lens feels and looks like a very high quality product, even compare to the most expensive lenses.

See in more detail at:

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

Review Date: Jun 16, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Nice contrast, beautiful colors, sharpness wide open, stabilizer, 1.8m close focus distance, very good with 1.4x Kenko converter
some people don't like push pull design, bokeh can be better

This is a very good lens. Excellent build quality, stabilizer, sharpness wide open. What the Sigma xxx-500m lenses lacks (sharpness wide open, contrast) this lens has it. Very good with the Kenko 1.4x dgx converter as well
(autofocusing) not autofocusing with the Canon 1.4x, except perhaps on 1 series camera bodies. Highly recommended if you have the budget for it. I would give 9.5 if there was an option like this. I wouldn't give 10 because the long primes has better picture quality/bokeh.

See in more detail here:

Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR AF-S

Review Date: May 30, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: Light, very sharp up to 200mm, quick and precise focus, good stabilizer, enjoyable to use
soft at 300mm, little plasticy

This is an interesting lens. Tack sharp up to 200mm, at 300mm not so sharp, but ok, but if it would be sharp who would buy the 300mm f/4 for lot more bucks? Very enjoyable to use, good for general usage, for birding or wildlife to me it is not a keeper, not just sharpness but colors and general image quality is not up there, even 200mm, even it is very sharp here, it is a consumer lens, good point can get relatively cheap, and not bad at all.

See in more detail at:

Nikon 105mm f/2.8 ED-IF AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor

Review Date: May 29, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: This is a very nice lens, excellent sharpness, nice colors, and detail, quick focus
little big, little fat, don't know the reason

This lens has excellent image quality nothing to complain about. The 100mm focal length is good for portraits as well. The autofocus is also quick and precize.

See in more detail at:

Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G IF-ED AF-S Nikkor

Review Date: May 29, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Very sharp even wide open down to the corners, very good build quality, sharper than many prime lenses
expensive, but it is worth it for people who know how to use it, no filters

This is an extremely good lens even compare to prime lenses. Sharp from corner to corner. Pictures sharp even almost 100% at the Nikon d7100 camera, a bigger piece of equipment though without vr.

See in more detail at:

Nikon 70-200mm f/4G ED VR AF-S Nikkor

Review Date: May 29, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Tack sharp wide open at both ends of the range, excellent vr, light and small
price is very high, feels not toughly build

Not to much to think of this lens, because it is optically and mechanically excellent, except for the price which is very high. This lens is excellent optically but feels not so rock solidly built like Canons. For this price I want bulletproof lens perhaps, but on the other hand it is small and light which is preferable.

See in more detail at:

Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM "A"

Review Date: May 29, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Let's claim it Sigma does what nobody else made before: a sharp 18-35 f/1.8 zoom and this lens is very sharp even at f/1.8, excellent top of the line build quality as well. I know how good this lens is I checked lots of very sharp lenses before.
perhaps autofocus is not as good as Canons, I didn't recognize it is so bad

This is an excellent lens: excellent sharpness even wide open, excellent build quality, but little big, expensive and heavy for Aps-C, perhaps better to make this lens a Full frame version for even more money, 18-35mm range is not so fascinating for a beginner, for a pro a FF is perhaps better. The f/1.8 gives opportunities never known before, but the dof is also very thin which can be challenging.

See in more detail at:

Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX APO RF HSM

Review Date: May 29, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

Pros: Wide range, quick and precise autofocus, not bad at 300-400mm, or shorter focal lengths
heavy, expensive, not so sharp at long end

This is a heavy monster. The 1.8kg compare to 1.3 is a huge difference. The autofocus is like Canons quick and precise even for flying birds, no limiter though. I guess everybody interested for the lens's long end, I checked against the Canon 200mm+2x converter at 400mm (both at f/8). (Not 500mm where it is weaker). The two combination is app the same, the picture quality of the 50-500 is not bad but not stellar either even at 400mm. At 500mm f/10 is the sharpest. If someone wants wide range is good, but heavy. The 200mm +2x is 995g and not worse optically, even faster (f/5.6 vs f/6.3). For little birds is not the best, for bigger objects perhaps better. Framing is easier but the zoom ring is stiff. Build quality far from Canon L. I wouldn't give this lens an 8. Perhaps the new Tamron 150-600 is a better bargain.

See in more detail at:

Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM

Review Date: May 29, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fantastic picture quality, excellent sharpness for macro, good build quality small and light, very nice manual focus ring
it is hard to find real negatives for this lens

This is a fantastic lens, incredible sharpness for macro, beautiful colors and bokeh, but a working distance is little close almost at the end of the hood. Small and light and has good build quality.

See in more detail at:

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM

Review Date: May 29, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Very good sharpness even outside of macro distances, good working distance for macro, good contrast and sharpness even wide open, very good even with 1.4x converter wide open
little big, but not heavy

This is a very nice lens, very good overall, but for macro the Canon 60mm is sharper. The working distance is better for the 100mm, and for longer distances the 100mm has more natural look.

See in more detail at:

Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8G AF-S DX

Review Date: Jan 10, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: It is a very good lens, very sharp, excellent build quality
Little heavy, expensive, vr would be useful, only for Dx

This is a very good quality, well built lens, but little heavy and expensive. I prefer the 16-85 and 35 f1.8 combo. Only for DX.

See in more detail at:

Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR AF-S DX Nikkor

Review Date: Jan 10, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: This little lens is surprisingly good compare to the price, especially at the wide end
build quality is not the best

If your budget only allows this lens don't be discouranged this is a very good lens especially at the wide end. Sharp, silent focusing and vr are nice features for this price. According to me the wide end is better than the wide end of the 18 105.

See in more detail at:

Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX Micro-Nikkor

Review Date: Jan 10, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: I would say for this lens in Nikon system as a "Must have" if you have a budget for it and like to shoot low light and indoors. Would be happy if Canon can offer something similar. Very sharp even wide open. 35mm f1.8 Dx I don't think is a micro
Build quality not up to pro standards, but for this price no complain

This is a very useful lens with its brightness and optical quality. The 35mm is much more useful on Dx format than the 50mm according to my liking.
Highly recommended !

See in more detail at:

Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR ED-IF AF-S DX S

Review Date: Jan 10, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: This is an excellent lens with an excellent range, highly recommended, the stabilizer also very effective, I made my first sharp shot at 1/8s, I was amazed.
None, perhaps some people prefers brighter lenses

This lens has a fantastic value if someone doesn't want to change lenses all the time. The 16mm wide angle is also very nice to have as well the 85 mm long end. Highly recommended. Apart from this lens perhaps only the 35mm f1.8 needed.

See in more detail at:

Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM A1

Review Date: Oct 7, 2013 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp at f1.4, nice contrast from f1.4, quick and quiet focus, relatively small
Non I can think of

This is a dream lens: sharp at f1.4 with very nice contrast and colours, which is true perhaps almost all apertures. Build quality is very nice also. Rounded aperture blades, creates nice bokeh. Chromatic aberration very low if any.

See in more detail at:


Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

Review Date: Sep 30, 2013 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Very fine picture quality, unified in the range, excellent build qualitym quick and accurate USM autofocus
Huge, expensive

This is a very fine lens, excellently built, optical qualities are awesome, a real pro lens, but a little bit big(No free lunch.) For me it is not heavy at all, perhaps heavy for smaller people.

See in more detail here:


Page:  1 · 2 · 3  next