Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: ssnap  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ssnap to your Buddy List
Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF]

Review Date: Jul 23, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $450.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharp, even at f2.8, great color and contrast, good build quality for plastic.
Lack of AF-S, still not loud and not the same build quality as the Nikon 17-55

I purchased this lens for wedding and event photography and I love it. This lens sits on my camera all the time. Even at f2.8 I get beautiful sharp images that are crystal clear. I've tried other f2.8 zooms from Nikon, Sigma, and even the Tamron 28-75f2.8
The Tamron 17-50 I purchased is sharper than all the others I tried and definatly a bargin purchase under $500!
If you are planning on purchasing this lens I suggest taking it for a test spin and checking out the photo's at full size before making a final purchase. I did this because of all the issues I heard this lens has with over exposure on the Nikon flash system and because I wanted to make sure that 2.8 was usable. On the sigma and Tamron 28-75 I've used neither were usable at f2.8. The images were so soft they seemed out of focus. The copy I got of the 17-50 how ever is wonderful and worth every penny.

Sigma 24-60mm f2.8 EX DG Lens

Review Date: May 26, 2007 Recommend? no | Price paid: $460.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Great build quality and zoom ring feels tight
Soft at 2.8-5.6, gave a yellowish tint to images, and the range is disappointing.

I tried this lens on my Nikon D70 and was very unimpressed with it. The images just were not as sharp as my D70 from 2.8-5.6 and from 5.6 and up image quality and sharpness matched. Color's were not as good as I hoped, all my images seemed to have some sort of yellowish tint that I'd have to correct for in PP even after pre-setting the white balance with my expo disc.
Build feels solid on this lens and much heavier than my 18-70.
I'd suggest anyone looking at this lens should take a look at other f2.8 lenses. This lens has a limited range and poor performance wide open.

Nikon 18-70 f/3.5-4.5G AFS DX

Review Date: May 26, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: AF-S and great range.
Not F2.8 and can be soft at 18-24 like other's have reported.

I got this lens with my D70 3 years ago, and it's still in use on my D200. I would like to have some 2.8 glass in this range but after testing the Sigma 24-60 f2.8 I realized that 2.8 isn't always that great. This isn't the sharpest mid-range zoom, but I don't have any complaints wide-open with this lens. I found with the sigma I used that it was softer up to f5.6 and f2.8-4 on that lens wasn't pretty and I wouldn't want to use it. Note: I haven' tried the 17-50 tamron or 18-50 f2.8 sigma.
While this lens is slower, it does have the AF-S for quick and quiet AF and does well at 3.5-4.5.

Nikon 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF

Review Date: Mar 5, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $300.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Good sharp walk around lens at a low price, and has IF to keep the front element from rotaiting during AF/MF allowing for easier use of my CP filter.

For a plastic body it feels sturdy and I know that the plastic mount isn't the most popular but how big of a difference with a lens that will stay on your camera the majority of the time? Also it's not a heavy weight coming in lighter than my 18-70 DX. I would also say that I'm getting sharper images than I do with the 18-70DX. I the 28-200 G so much that I got rid of the 18-70 because I didn't use it. I don't miss the wide angle and if I really get serious about it I'll get the Nikon 12-24mm DX.
If you're just an average day to day user I'd recommend this little gem. Even if you are serious about photography as a hobby you will be very pleased with this lens. I tested this in the store with the 24-120 VR and found that my images from this were sharper during normal use, of course it can't match the VR's slow shutter speed performance. I don't regret my choice, and am very happy to have this little guy.