Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: Andrei T  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Andrei T to your Buddy List
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

Review Date: Mar 3, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,500.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: SHARP – right out of the camera! Outstanding build quality! Lightning fast AF. F/2.8!
NOT dust/moisture sealed? Cannon – Hello!!???

Yes – all I thought this lens would be is actually true. I won’t go over the things said here in the reviews again – I am simply agreeing that the lens is outstanding!

My only nugget is lack of dust/moisture protection. Canon? This obviously can’t be a reason to give this excellent piece of glass a ‘9’. I love it.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

Review Date: Mar 3, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,280.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Build quality! IS is superb. Overall look and feed is excellent. Range. Compact and reasonably weighted.
Soft at F/4 throughout the entire range (image quality improves stopping down and peaks at about F/9 – with IS ON). Low-light photography is disappointing to say the least.

For starters: I have done through 2 copies. Result – I sold the lens and bought 70-200 L F/2.8

Why sell? Softness was killing me. While this is an excellent build / look lens, the images produced on 20D and XT were just OK. OK is not a definition of the ‘L’ standard. Now, I might have gotten two bad copies – sure, but we are talking about the highly priced ‘L’ optics here and bad copies are not acceptable. I will no rate this lens at a ‘2’ or a ‘5’ – this is just no fair, but it’s not (not for me anyway) a ‘9’ or ‘10’ in my case. Taking pictures with IS ON gave me decent pictures AFTER the ‘unsharp’ masking in PS – this is unacceptable (for me). The F/4 is slow, but by all means is not the disadvantage of the lens. You know what you are buying – why mark is as a con? Yes it’s slow, but would it be sharper – I’d keep this lens without thinking. Having taken a few dozens shots with 70-200 L F/2.8 (non-IS version) at 70mm F/4 (through to 105mm) and compared it with 24-105 F/4 (same: 70mm – 105mm at F/4 with IS ON) served me as a confirmation that the 24-105mm F4 L lens is indeed soft. Yes – stopping down does make the image more acceptable, but you are loosing the F stops and the low light shooting becomes a huge challenge even with IS ON. I know now that F/4 is just not my cup of tea and F/2.8 is indeed a solution for the type of photography. I might consider buying this lens again (for vacations) in the future, but only after the Canon QC deals with all the issues AND when the price drops (as I think the lens is overpriced).

I would still recommend the lens to someone, who would like to own only one lens that would do it all (providing you have the time for going through copies till you get the good one). The lens is very well constructed and has an incredibly useful rage. If you are looking for a walk around glass and not too picky on fine details – this might be a winner in your books.