about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: sjms  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add sjms to your Buddy List
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM

16-35II
Review Date: Mar 30, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,470.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Wide as i want it on a FF camera
Cons:
At f2.8 still isn't what i expected. better then the 1st gen but still falls a little short in FF.

FF view 1Ds2
while it is an improvement over its previous namesake at wide open at 16mm the lower right corner it soft. move up to the smaller apertures and it is quite a nice lens. i kind of expected i higher quality image. it is more of a marginal improvement overall. i will need to give it a good work out and see.


 
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

24-105lisusm
Review Date: Oct 6, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: lighter, smaller, and and excellent range. then they throw in the IS. well someone was thinking at canon
Cons:
just the obvious one. you know the slightly large empty space where once cold hard cash occupied.

what can i say. my new standard lens

 
Gitzo G2227 Explorer


Review Date: Sep 14, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $520.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: it works out all the angles. especially with a good ballhead.
Cons:
the centerpost could be a few inches longer.

i really like this tripods design. it allows the user to move the camera into just about any position necessary to get the shot. i own the G2228 explorer since they are relatively the same i will rate them as equals. light, relatively compact, stiff, and maneuverable. its an excellent field tripod especiallly for macro work.

 
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

ef_16-35_28_1_
Review Date: Dec 31, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: nice and wide when i need it
Cons:
haven't really found too much yet to bother me.

it seems the mixed reviews of this lens are somewhat overdone, at least to me. i'm shooting with it as my primary lens often on a 1D2 and as my secondary on a 1Ds2. i just like it. its WIDE when i need it. i defer to christos comments on the subject of the way people review. at full frame i still find it to give a satisfying view and image at all focal lengths within its design limits.