Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: ---XR---  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ---XR--- to your Buddy List
Zeiss 35mm f/2 Distagon T*

Review Date: Jun 8, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $750.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Contrast, build.

it's a carl zeiss, so this is almost a no brainer. Smooth but heavier focus- which is great for accurate MF. contrast out the wazoo, it's a great walk around FX or DX lens, i actually quit useing zooms for a considerable time after picking this lens up, still one of the first things that goes in my bag.

i reccomend getting an adapter for a 77mm filter and leaving it on, if your anything like me- you'll have mostly bigger filters anyways, and than you can use a solid nikon lenscap, which is better than the zeiss one, that is a little flimsy.

Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM

Review Date: Nov 6, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

Pros: WIDE
flare, optically unimpressive compared to 12-24 tokina/nikon.

good but not great. not a fan of the sigma build in comparison to the rock solid in every way 12-24 tokina's i've shot in the past, for the price i'd go with those. However i've have had situation in which 12mm on DX isn't wide enough. so the 10-20 does have something they don't. not happy with flare performance. if you need something WIDE on DX though, this is your girl unless you want to spend $900 on the 10-24 nikkor with variable aperture and plastic build (no thanks).

Nikon 600mm f/4D IF-ED AF-S II Nikkor

Review Date: Oct 21, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $6,700.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Weight (surprisingly), Sharpness/IQ (duh), AF speed (duh).
If you can afford it- None

The previous and former version to this lens are the AF-S 1 and the AF-S VR, both which are also tremendous in their own right, however this lens is the lightest of the three. That is something to consider highly when you are like me and are carrying this mounted or tri/monopod to a destination. considering i really didn't need VR because it's heavy enough it doesn't feel natural handholding and i'd need to use a support system and being VR is meant to be off if it's supported, it wasn't a necessary feature for me.

My real consideration for buying the VR over this lens came from the fact i love the contrast and glare reduction from the nano coating the VR uses. after i used this lens i never cared it didn't have it, because the images are still contrasty to my taste, and glare is minimal. i don't have experience with the VR's AF, however considering how this lens performs i really can't see any reason to pay $3000 more to find out. needless to say i'm very happy with this lens. )Tc'ed for wildlife usually (1.4-1.7)- fantastic.

Tokina 28-70mm f/2.8 AT-X 287 AF PRO SV

Review Date: Mar 18, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $215.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Price, aperture

This lens is good but not great, in terms of price i got more than i paid for, but in no way does it stand up to my Nikkor version, AF is slower, IQ not up to par with it, but it was 1/5 the price so it'll stay as a backup for myself, for someone who wants a mid range zoom for ethier FF or crop but doesn't want to pay $1000-1700 for the top of the line, but still wants the aperture, this'll do the trick.

Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR AF-S

Review Date: Mar 18, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $450.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: size/weight, VR, Value
not a pro build (but for the price it's just fine).

This lens is by my account, probably the best value nikon offers. For travel i loved this lens, if i didn't need the aperture of the other lenses i'd use it more. what you get is a suprisingly sharp zoom with a VR system and a whole lot of ease of use for a very resonable sum, i've owned a few 70-300's of different makes and this is just stellar (the best), I've also owned/used nikons offerings in the 70-200 VR1 and 80-200 AFS/D models. while not as sharp i like this better. the extra 100mm+weight difference and price with good IQ was a no brainer for me. I always shot this in manual focus so i can't talk about the AF, i'll assume from my other AF-S lenses it's great. as you can imaging it doesn't have the pro feel or build, but you get what you pay for and i was fine with this.

Nikon 300mm f/4 ED-IF AF-S Nikkor

Review Date: Mar 16, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,050.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: lightweight (hand holdable), takes well with 1.4x., close focus distance, super sharp, quick AF.

the best aspect is the weight/size, because of it it can be handheld and with the good AF tracking BIF or other wildlife is an absoulute ease. the shots are sharp, i don't even mind cropping down on the 4.1 MP D2H, which is definetly a compliment. takes the 1.4 without losss in IQ and small in AF.

Nikon 60mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Micro-Nikkor

Review Date: Nov 3, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $480.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: sharp as a katana, small and versital, AF-S, the front element stays where it is unlike the most other macro's when focusing
if there were any, i'd tell you.

The only reason i sold this lens was to go to a longer lens for insects photography, and honeslty as much as i like that lens, I don't think i've ever owned as Sharp or as good a general purpose lens as the AF-S 60m micro. this girl has a gorgeus bokeh, and could be used for portraits aswell as alot of macro work, bravo nikon!

Tokina 100mm f/2.8 AT-X 100 AF PRO D

Review Date: Oct 1, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $300.00 | Rating: 9 


quality build, great like every tokina i've owned to this point, sharp, easy AF/MF switch, great focal length. got mine for a great price too.

Tamron 70-300MM F/4-5.6 LD Macro AF

Review Date: Apr 20, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $88.00 | Rating: 2 


I paid 88 bucks for this lens, and it was the second lens i ever bought after a 18-70 nikkor. I was impressed being that it had such range, but in retrospect the lens is truely you get what you pay for.

It feels very light and therefor, cheap. it's image quality is sometimes half decent and in low light, just dismal.

If your new to DSLR's, and own an entry level nikon camera, it's a good lens to buy for learning how to shoot correctly, but for anyone who has used anything semi better, you realize this is a Toy's R Us lens.

Nikon 28-70mm f/2.8 ED-IF AF-S

Review Date: Apr 20, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $975.00 | Rating: 9 


Very sharp, for the past 8 years it was the best nikkor zoom in this range, and even with the release of the 24-70 G this lens still hold it's own. The same optically, just a tad shorter and currently $600 cheaper. very well built. Has the Pro feel and balences correctly on a D200/D300 (w grip) or D2/D3 series.