Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: vgopalk  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add vgopalk to your Buddy List
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Review Date: Apr 9, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,300.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Excellent Build. FAST Lens.
Heavy (read long comment in Post)

Just returned from a 4-month trip to South America. I carried a 5D body, the 24-70/2.8 and an old 75-300/4-5.6 lens. The 75-300 was used when I needed the long range to shoot wildlife. 95% of the time the 24-70 was on the 5D. Much as I would have loved to get the 24-105/4.0, I wanted the speed this lens provided and it did not disappoint.

I would love to see canon come out with a 24-105/2.8. Assume it is of a good quality and costs less than $2000, that would be the SINGLE lens I would own.

After 4-months of having the lens in your backpack or on your neck, you develop a stoop! I dread to think what state I will be reduced to once I get the 70-200/2.8 lens Smile

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

Review Date: Apr 5, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,700.00

Pros: Good Solid Lens
Interference Banding ??

Hello all. I have some queries on this lens. I did rent the lens over the past weekend and shot 4-rolls. While waiting for the slides and prints to be processed, I was reading about "interference banding". (on the EOS-30D)

When and Why does this happen? More importantly, does the 70-200 IS / USM 2.8 suffer from "interference banding"?

Does this Interference banding applying to FILM cameras (or) Only digital SLRs ?

If indeed, this lens does suffer from "interference banding", are there ways to get around it? (Do I need to use it only with FILM SLRs and not Digital, shoot at certain speeds etc)

Since there are many of you who have used this lens for a long time, I was hoping for some clarity on this issue.

If it helps avoid clutter on this site, you can reply directly to me at '[email protected]'.

Thank You all.

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

Review Date: Mar 8, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated


Maybe I am missing something here. How can DUST get through to the CCD sensor because of the lens?

Be it a film or a digital camera, shouldn't the light rays be the only ones to pass through the lens and reach the focal plane containing the film or the sensor?

I can understand that dust will collect between the outer and inner cylinders of the lens (whether the lens is a rotating zoom or a push-pull zoom). How will it reach the sensors? (unless the user decides to CHANGE the lens during a dust storm!)

I realize that this is not a review per-se, but more to understand what the reviewers are talking about.

For those interested in corresponding to me directly, the address is [email protected]

Thank You