Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF AF
|
|
Review Date: Jan 18, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
hmm not many, nice brokeh thats about it
|
|
Cons:
|
soft at all apertures, not really well built, slow focusing, slow in general... big and clunky for a slow lens
|
|
|
didnt enjoy my time with this old lens. I think it really shows its age, the kit lens puts this to shame... the brokeh was the nicest part of this lens and the colours were very warm, nice too so its not all bad but certainly much worse than a nikkor kit lens.
in comparison to say a 28-70L F2.8 i used to have on my canon this is really not too impressive, in fact i shouldnt even compare them.
Do yourself a favour and buy something with af-s...
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II DX AF-S
|
|
Review Date: Dec 23, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $50.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
light, small, sharp, fast focusing, cheap
|
|
Cons:
|
slow max arperture, plastic
|
|
|
Got this free with my d40x and must say i was pleasantly surprised how sharp it was. I dont like zooms much so have now decided to stick with this for holidays or trips. It is sharp and light and will deliver excellent quality providing you can use it in good light or with a flash.
keep one in your bag.
|
|
|
|
|
Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM
|
|
Review Date: Dec 14, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $380.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
30mm is perfect, sharp at f1.4, fast focusing, nice size and feel
|
|
Cons:
|
focusing in low light possibly?
|
|
|
Ive owned 12-24, 15mm, 20-40 and now a 30mm sigma and have never had an issue with qc problems. The 30mm is no exception, from the little time ive had it i think it produces fantastic results at all f stops.
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon D70s
|
|
Review Date: Dec 3, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
nice size, great user interface, lens compatibility, good images in low iso, high shutter speeds great for sport
|
|
Cons:
|
Tends to clip highlights a bit too often for my liking, small lcd, high iso is noisey
|
|
|
I picked up a brand new camera for a couple of quid since no one wants old technology. Compared to my previous d50/d200 this camera id say produces slightly poorer results tending to clip highlights more frequently. Images seem better underexposed a stop or two and using raw.
I use this alongside a D40x and am enjoying the experience.
A pretty good camera even by todays standards.
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon D40x
|
|
Review Date: Dec 3, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $150.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
clean iso 1600, kit lens is pretty amazing in good light, compact body, great lcd, bright viewfinder, cheap, excellent camera
|
|
Cons:
|
no D lens motor, grip a touch too thin, lack of dedicated buttons
|
|
|
I bought a mint copy for a bargain to use as a 2nd camera. The image quality is much better than my d70s in low light so i use to as a go to camera for family snap shots. Im quite surprised that a low end camera can render such clean files much cleaner than the d200, d70s and eos 1d i previously used.
sadly its only manual focus on non af-s/hsm lens so i wouldnt have this as my be all end all camera, but definately good enough as a back up body/ travel camera.
thoroughly recommended...
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon D200
|
|
Review Date: Jul 14, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
great ergonomics, nice screen, like the focusing screen, bright viewfinder, user interface, build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Lots of noise at 800 and above, hot pixels, quite heavy
|
|
|
I owned a D200 coming from a canon 1D/ 350D and a Nikon D50. The camera performs excellently in bright conditions and well done to nikon for the excellent grip and user interface it is superior to Canon gear.
My only gripe was the image quality was not comparable to my 1D in good light and barely much better in low light conditions. I was dismayed to see that there were even hot pixels in several places when images were taken anything above iso400. The D50 was a better low light performer than the D200 although focusing was not quite on par.
I ended up selling the d200 because of the issues with low light and hot pixelling. I imagine nikon sorted these issues out with the D300 which seems like a compelling and worthwhile upgrade.
IMHO the original 1D is still king those huge photosites are amazing....
|
|
|
|
|
Sigma 15mm f2.8 EX Diagonal Fisheye
|
|
Review Date: Mar 11, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $330.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Small, sharp, light
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
Only used on an interior snap shot and the curvature is fun and not off putting. I liked the fact it doesnt distort in a wavy way like my 18-200vr so is easily correctable in NX.
It looks sharp above f4 but usable at 2.8. looks like a high quality optic and i remain impressed with sigma wide angles. Much nicer to have in a bag then the hefty 12-24 and cheap too.
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon D50
|
|
Review Date: Jan 30, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $320.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
great looking images out of camera, low noise, full functionality
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
bought a well used camera for next to nothing and think I will keep this for a while. Images are always sharp and punchy straight out of the camera and 6mp is plenty for most applications. I have used this alongside a d200 and always preferred the size of the files from the d50. Files are always well exposed are colourful, even more so than the d200 images which required a lot of pp to be acceptable. Comparing to the other cameras i have used so far (canon 1D, 30D, 400D, 350D) and the d200, I think apart from the 1D i am enjoying the images from this camera the most. Pick one up for backup or as a lightweight dslr for next to nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 35mm f/2D AF Nikkor
|
|
Review Date: Jan 23, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $260.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
small, light, fast motor
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft at F2 until F4.
|
|
|
I owned the equivilent canon and found the canon to be sharper and produce better results. Without running scientific I'd still rate the buzzy canon as a better lens although this does focus faster and quiter. My copy is quite soft at f2 maybe due to the shallow depth of field and my nikons poor AF. At F4 the lens is sharp across the board.I tend to rely on a flash unit internally to get acceptable shots so not sure if this lens is useful as fast glass for low light photography.
Is it worth 3 times the amount of a 50mm f1.8? Im not so sure however the focal length is useful on a crop and these tend to keep their value well. Still a pretty nice lens to have in your bag for lightweight descreet photography.
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED DX VR AF-S
|
|
Review Date: Nov 10, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
great focal range, light and compact, VR
|
|
Cons:
|
wavy distortion at 18mm, lens creeps if pointing down and not locked in place at 18mm setting. Seems to underexpose slightly and not up to pro grade image quality.
|
|
|
pretty much echo the last review, great all in one travel lens. I moved over from canon 1d setup with 6L lens to a D200 and this because of its convienience. Image quality is a sizable difference however i wish to shoot with smaller primes to complement this lens.
recommended.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 28-70mm f/2.8L USM
|
|
Review Date: Jul 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $850.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Colour, Usm, Range, Creamy smooth Brokeh, Sharpness F2.8!
|
|
Cons:
|
Price?
|
|
|
I bought this lens specifically for a friends wedding (In the london eye, regents park and a restaurant) as I enjoyed the 70-200F4L and wanted a standard fast zoom. I thought about a new 24-70L but knew buying a mint copy of this famous lens would save me a few bucks and produce a similar result.
Well throughout the wedding I used this lens about 90% of the time and only reached for my sigma 12-24 for the group shots in confined space. The colour, contrast and speed is what puts a canon lens in a different level to sigma although sigma do give sharp results for the money.
Im just going through DPP and am very very happy with the results that are coming from this lens. I would recommend picking up a mint copy somehow as this was only like $250 cheaper than a brand new 24-70.
I think Im hooked on this and am looking to flog most of my gear now. My 1d and this classic lens will serve me well for many years to come.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 35mm f/2
|
|
Review Date: May 10, 2007
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $180.00
|
|
Pros:
|
so so sharp and punchy
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
Since posting the review a while back, I have found that this lens provides really amazing performance and images for the money. I will never part with this lens now its so small and sharp. Would rate it a 10 in hindsight..
|
|
|
|
|
Sigma 12-24mm f4.5-5.6 EX DG Aspherical HSM
|
|
Review Date: Mar 17, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $540.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
super wide, great build, sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
slow for interior shots, quite heavy, some flare
|
|
|
Picked up a 2nd hand copy and was slightly concerned about recieving a soft copy after reading so many forums and views. Afer shooting a few shots in good light i am mightily impressed. The wide angle on my 1d equates to around 15mm and at last provides the length o am looking for. The built in lens hood offers the bulbous glass a good level of protection, so i dont really agree with the negative vibes that this lens has recieved.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 35mm f/2
|
|
Review Date: Feb 21, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $190.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
light, sharp and cheap
|
|
Cons:
|
washed out contrast, colour but only requires a little pp increase contrast and saturation forexcellent images
|
|
|
Bought 2nd hand to complement my 350D before selling and upgrading to a 1D. Its a good lens images are sharp and good 1stop down, excellent 2 stops down and usable at f2.
I only shoot raw so the natural saturation and contrast levels recorded on this lens only require slight adjustments to create excellent sharp images.
Not quite as beautiful as images from my 70-200 F4L but infinately more usable indoors.
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EOS 1D
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EOS 1D
|
|
Review Date: Dec 11, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Pro build, customisation, excellent colour, sharp images, good dynamic range
|
|
Cons:
|
I knew everything about this camera before finding a good sample and therefore i find no negative issues. Awaiting new batteries to allow use as intended. High ISO shots are not as refined as newer cameras but buyer should be aware of this anyway, still ISO 1600 can be used with care.
|
|
|
Although I have only had the camera for a couple of weeks I had been looking to purchase one for over a year and based on a few trips to test the camera these are my initial thoughts.
1: When exposed accurately images from the 1D are excellent, providing vivid and true colours with incredible sharpness.
2: Using this camera as it was intended you cannot be dissapointed. Ok with 4MPX cropping images too much may not be recommended but the purpose of the camera is to understand photography by carefully composing shots prior to shooting. Users must be careful not to underexpose too much as the 1D is sensitive to banding if the image is not exposed properly, this is a pro camera and so if you use it the way it is intended you will get the results you are looking for.
3: I am glad to say that the images shot in raw and proccessed in canons DPP software using the available Picture Styles will enable users to avoid photoshop altogether.
My camera came with no software but after some careful sourcing they are availible. Please update files from the canon websites for the latest Twain, Utility and DPP software.
4: Custom curves are a must for JPG's straight from the camera, again the customisation of the 1D is a huge plus
that allows the user to modify their shooting styles to suit.
5: The overall feel of the body is superb and coming from a 350D with all its handling issues I find the 1D a perfect step up in quality. I have no real need for sport shooting which this camera is famed for but i do have a need for images to be sharp, colours to be vivid and to contain lots of detail. Used primarily for landscape and architecture is still perfectly fine so long as you look for the photograph. If you pixel peep then yes it will not be as detailed as say the MarkII or 1DS but this we all know.
6: Use of lens are still cropped with the DPS-H sensor but the 1D uses the sweet spots of the lens and will make even a moderate lens seem amazing.
7: The 1D perfectly balances with a newer eos model as part of a 2 camera kit. The newer eos will shoot better long exposures and be more adaptable in low light internal shooting. If you are to have the 1D as your all in one camera then be prepared to learn the strengths and weaknesses of the body, investing in new batteries and a flash and you will not be dissapointed.
After waiting for a year and a half for this reknowned body I am happy to recommend it to photography enthusiasts who want to capture the best images. For general consumers I would think twice before buying as this is not a simple camera to use and is not intended for the happy snapper. Available for the price of an XT this camera is a bargain and i doubt i will let it go in a hurry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
