about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: tallberg  

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

16-35II
Review Date: Aug 9, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excellent image quality.
Cons:
None worth mentioning.

I upgraded from a 17-40, and have used this lens for landscapes on a 5D for two months at the time of writing. The 17/40 was not bad, but the corner sharpness of the 16/35II is really significantly better on a full-frame camera - well worth the upgrade. For me, this quickly became a lens which I can just use and forget - it does not seem to have any issues or restrictions that would need to be taken into account. This is a very good thing indeed. Highly recommended.

 
Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye

ef15mmf_28_1_
Review Date: Oct 18, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $600.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: High quality images, possibly the best ultrawide solution for canon fullframe systems short of the very expensive exotics.
Cons:
Very annoying cap, but easily fixed.

I've used this lens for a few months, and my point of comparison is the 17-40/4L. The 15 fisheye is a gem in many ways - surprisingly sharp corners, surprisingly good contrast even in misty, backlit shots. It resolves detail well for such a wide-angle beast, and I was surprised at how well it controls flare - but this has to be taken in context, this is an ultra wide. There's a bit of CA, but it's quite regular and the standard post-processing tools make short work of it.

I am no fan at all of barrel distortion and the actual fish-eye effect, but the point is that with software de-fishing this is a surprisingly good substitute for a rectilinear ultrawide. De-fished, it's a 12 mm WA lens, and since you'd almost always would need to correct the perspective and barrel distortion in postprocessing with such a lens, the de-fishing is not that much trouble. More to the point, I am not aware of a 12 mm rectilinear lens with comparable performance to be had at a comparable price.

As noted by almost all users, the lens cap is annoying. A piece of velcro tape helps a lot, but does not solve the issue completely.


 
Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM

ef135mmf_2l_1_
Review Date: Sep 22, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Very, very good lens indeed.
Cons:
None.

Fantastic lens - sharpness, colors, bokeh, everything is as good as I have seen it get. The shallow DOF takes some getting used to, and the old one-per-focal-length rule of thumb for getting sharp shots handheld does not really hold with glass of this quality. Pictures that are good at 1/160 can be really much better at 1/500 with a lens like this - tripod, mirror lock up and so on can make a quite surprising difference. With a 1.4 teleconverter and a 500D diopter it makes for a very sharp and convenient almost-macro - one gets something like .7 magnification, convenient working distance, and very good quality. Recommended!