about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: roberto1979  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add roberto1979 to your Buddy List
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

ef17-40_4l_1_
Review Date: Jan 17, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $525.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Build, image quality even in the corners, weight, price
Cons:
none

There's been a lot of talk these days about Nikons 14-24 WA and it got me curious. I'm not really a pixel peeper, but I decided to do some test shots with my 17-40 and I was really impressed with the corner sharpness on my 5D. I personally picked this lens because I hike a lot, I'm broke, and I shoot on a tripod. If weight is a factor, price is a factor, and f/2.8 is not a factor, this could be the lens for you.

 
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

ef70_200_4_1_
Review Date: Jan 17, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $375.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Image quality, weight, AF, price
Cons:
It's not a 16-600mm f/1.8 IS?

As a landscaper I have fallen in love with all these amazing f/4 lenses Canon has. They're in a sweet spot of price/weight/quality that absolutely no one else can match. The build on this lens is great, it focuses very quickly, and the image quality is out of this world. I recently shot a 6 shot panorama with this and the 5D that I printed 24x72. The detail is almost scary. Buy this lens!

 
Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM

ef400mmf_56_1_
Review Date: Dec 31, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $900.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: So sharp my photos actually cut me!
Cons:
For the price, nothing. If you wanted to pay more, IS might be nice.

WOW!!! I bought this and a 40D for an incredible, but not budget busting wildlife setup. I had a Bigma before, and the results were always average at best. The sharpness of this lens wide open is just amazing. It equals all my other L lenses when they're stopped down to f/8.

Pros: Did I mention this lens is sharp? Lightweight. I don't mind carrying it handheld for miles. Focus is amazingly fast. Built in hood is very very nice. Everyone that sees it looks at me like I'm a pro. It's cheap!!! I paid $900 for a perfect used copy that was only 1 year old.

Cons: It's not the fastest lens, but with 300 days of sun in Colorado, sunlight is rarely an issue. I guess if you shot in less light IS might be nice, but I can't imagine the price would stay the same. I personally wouldn't pay more to have IS. The biggest con to this lens though is now that I've finally gotten some really impressive eagle shots, I'd love to have a 600mm lens for just a bit more reach, because the quality of the pictures this lens produces are addicting!


 
Canon EOS 40D

40d
Review Date: Dec 24, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: FPS, Buffer, AF, 3 custom settings, great new menu lay out, High ISO quality, Price.
Cons:
It makes me want to spend 6 grand on a fast telephoto

First let me say I'm giving this a ten in all categories.

I'm very impressed with this camera. I shoot with a 5D 90% of the time, but do the occasional wildlife/sporting shooting, and I didn't feel the 5D cut it for that.

The Pros. 6.5 fps is awesome, and it just sounds ridiculous. The buffer states 17 Raw files, which it always maxes out at, but I shot 120 Large, Fine JPEGS in a row before my buffer filled on an older Sandisk Ultra II. That's well above the 75 stated by Canon. The AF is much improved compared to the 5D. 3 Custom settings on the dial is great. I have one set up for landscapes which has mirror lock up set(I know a lot of people complain about that), one for wildlife/action shooting, and one general shooting. I like the addition of the "My Menu" function on new layout. It gives me my 6 most used settings at the touch of a button. The high ISO quality isn't up to the standards set by the 5D, but in good lighting, ISO 800 is totally usable, even for larger prints. I picked up mine used for $1100, and I feel for the price, this camera is an absolute steal!

The Cons. None really. If I had to nit pick, the resolution on the new Nikons sounds really nice, but I only use the LCD for reviewing the histogram, not for critical focus check. Another thing that Nikon has that I wish Canon would implement is more than 3 shots for the exposure bracketing. I think the Nikons have 7. Neither of these are a knock against this camera, just Canon's way of doing things in general for their entire line.

I have a feeling that this camera will have me wanting to move up from the 400 f/5.6 to one of the uber expensive telephotos to get all the reach I can Smile


 
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

24-105lisusm
Review Date: May 5, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $600.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: L lens, IS, great range on a 5D, very sharp at f/4.
Cons:
vignetting at f/4, but i rarely shoot that wide.

found a store that was selling the 5D and 24-105 for only 3399, so i decided to try this lens knowing i could easily sell it for more than i paid. i previously was using the tamron 24-135. that lens is absolutely incredible image quality wise, and it's only $400. so now that i've added IS, USM, and a constant aperture for only $200 bucks i feel like i'm ahead. i do wish it went to 135mm, but i have other lenses that cover that range, so it's not a huge deal. this is my first L lens, and i'm definitely impressed so far.

 
Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX APO IF HSM

05_03_1_
Review Date: Dec 31, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $789.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: wow!
Cons:
now that i have a constant 2.8 lens, i want a longer one. it's addicting.

i've been into photography for about 18 months, and while i like all my current lenses, i have no "fast glass". the constant 2.8 is great to have. everyone wants to compare this lens to canons, but that's impossible in my opinion. canon can't seem to make a lens this nice for a resonable price like the sigma, so why compare? this lens works awesome with a teleconvertor. i've read where people talk about the weight, but i don't find it any issue at all. i have the Bigma, so that's what i consider to be heavy. the 70-200 just seems solid in my hands. the only real negative i've seen come from this lens is that now i understand why people love "bokeh" so now i want the sigma 120-300 for some extra reach to go with all that speed. anyone have 1900 bucks they can give me?????