Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: photorebel  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add photorebel to your Buddy List
Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

Review Date: Oct 14, 2007 Recommend? | Price paid: $580.00

Pros: Light, AF, razor sharp images..relatively inexpensive for an "L" lens.
What is there not to like, except you can't zoom it. Need a zoom, buy the 70-200.

After a year of use ...a definite 10!

I wasn't entirely happy with my 70-200 f/2.8L (non IS) which may have been user error, or maybe I didn't have a sharp copy. For whatever reason I sold it, and bought the 200 f/2.8L. After a few games, I knew I'd done the right thing.
This lens has become a workhorse for me. I used it at highschool track meets. And although I have a 300, I used it twice this year at highschool football games.
This is just a sharp, fast focusing lens. A real workhorse. I don't even use a monopod with this lens (attached to Mark IIn) and I still get razor sharp images.
It did take some adjustment, coming from a zoom, but the results I got are worth it. I wouldn't sell this lens for anything right now. It's my most used Canon lens!
Highly recommended!

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

Review Date: Oct 30, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $650.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Light, sharp, fast...easily hand holdable...faster focusing than 70-200 2.8L
Sometimes you just need the convenience of a zoom. Shooting football, I missed a few shots because I was too close.

I tried it out one night at highschool football game. Horrible lighting. I missed a few shots, because I was too close. Thought about returning it, and sticking with the 70-200 f/2.8.
That was before I saw the photos on my desktop.
Sharp, well focused, good color. A higher percentage of keepers than I ever got with the 70-200 f/2.8.
Bottom line, I'm selling the 70-200 f/2.8..and keeping the 200 f/2.8