Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: vince  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add vince to your Buddy List
Canon EF 24mm f/2.8

Review Date: Feb 2, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $250.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Very sharp, decent build, small, light and compact.

This was the first real wide angle lens I bought for my EOS system. Some of the most interesting shots I have were taken using this lens. Its sharpness, contrast and color saturation are excellent. It's nice to have a distance scale and a solid metal lens mount unlike the pathetic 50/1.8-II. This lens needs a hood - I noticed a little flare in some pictures I shot with hotspots in it. The images I've shot using this lens are distortion free. AF is very fast. This is an excellent lens.

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

Review Date: Feb 2, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $400.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Superb optics, good build, low key black design, compact, light, easy to carry and handhold.

I bought the mark-I version of this lens, second hand. It's one of the best lenses I've ever used or owned. The optics were absolutely superb, and the compact size and ease of handholding allowed me to do candids, street photography and general shooting without a tripod. The AF is very very fast and silent. There was nothing really wrong with this lens, but I realized that my shooting required a zoom more often than not, so I sold this and got a 70-200/4L instead. I still miss this lens, and if I buy another one I'd never sell it again.

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

Review Date: Feb 2, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $60.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Excellent optics, large aperture, small, light,
Cheap crummy construction, lousy AF motor.

My 50/1.8-II has excellent optics and delivers sharp, contrasty images. I hate the construction - it feels like it's going to break into pieces at any time. Still it's small and light and I take it almost everywhere. Wish they made an updated version with better construction, a distance scale, metal lens mount and real USM.

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

Review Date: Feb 2, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,300.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Very sharp optics, well constructed and solid
Bulky, heavy, push-pull "dust sucker" zoom, awkward when zoomed to 400mm.

Contrary to what many people claim, my sample had excellent optics. I couldn't tell the difference between the shots taken on this lens and the shots taken using the 200/2.8 or 100/2 lenses. Contrast and color are superb. IS really works and has saved my a** many times. However I had to sell this and replaced it with a 70-200/4L.

The lens used to suck in a lot of dust and after a couple of years of use I was horrified at the junk inside it. I also found it very awkward to balance at 300-400mm since it extends way out. Due to its bulk and weight I usually left it at home and grabbed a 200/2.8, 100 or 50mm lens instead. In the end I sold it. My shoulder thanks me now Smile

Canon EF 28-105mm f/4-5.6 USM

Review Date: Feb 2, 2004 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 2 

Pros: Compact and light
Poor image quality, slow speed, no true ring USM, flimsy construction

Do NOT confuse this lens with the vastly better 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM lens, which beats this lens in all respects - optics, true ring USM and focusing speed and construction. I suspect this lens is probably the successor to the equally inferior 28-90 "pseudo-USM". I tried this in the camera shop where I was hunting for some filters, and they had just got a new batch of the 28-105/4-5.6. When I picked up the lens it felt cheap and crummy like the lowest end 35-80 kit lenses. I put it on the 10D and shot a bit. AF was slow. Images were soft and I couldn't imagine why anyone would buy a lens like this. Of course, it could be that I used a poor sample.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

Review Date: Feb 2, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $600.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Superb sharpness and color and excellent optics, compact, light and handholdable.
Canon could have come out with an all-black version.

This is probably one of the best Canon lenses I own. I sold my 100-400L to purchase the 70-200/4. The optics are absolutely excellent even wide open, and the background blur is soft and creamy. It is small and light enough to take on everyday outings or vacations whereas the 100-400 (at twice the weight and size), was so heavy and bulky that it stayed home most of the time. This lens gets me more than 70% of indoor shots at parties/gatherings. Even though the new 70-300DO lens is out, I wouldn't sell this one.

Canon EF 28-90mm f/4-5.6 II USM

Review Date: Feb 2, 2004 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 2 

Pros: Compact, small filter size, light
Cheap plastic construction, poor image quality.

One needs to keep in mind that this lens is thrown in as a "kit" lens with cameras and lower expectations about performance, image quality, AF and everything else. Optics are mediocre at best. I'd donate this lens even if I got it free.


Page:  1 · 2 · 3