Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: Pierre_B  

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

Review Date: Mar 19, 2013 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,700.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: build, sharpness, perfect zoom focal length

As a music photographer working in arenas and such, this is my workhorse lens. If I could chose only one lens to live with, this would be it. The focal length is perfect to get some full body shots, and yet long enough for some nice head shots.

On a bigger stage, I'm not able to get a close up of the drummer, thats why I also have the 70-200 on a second camera.

The lens is amazingly sharp and has a very fast focus speed, which is essential for the photography I do - always in the dark.

The new version is sharper, but not sure it is worth it for the price. I'm still keeping this tried and true favorite for a while.

In fact, while my second body was being fixed up, I shot for about 2 weeks with only one camera and one lens, and this was the lens.

Here is a link to a bunch of show images all done with the 24-70 in a show this past March 2013

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM

Review Date: Mar 19, 2013 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,400.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Great optics, quality build
Wish the focal length didn't double over the 24-70. Something like a 14-24 would be nice.

Still a slightly expensive lens, but as always, you get what you pay for. I'm mainly an urban photographer and a music photographer. While I only sparingly use it for shows, this is my go to lens for urban walkarounds. I love getting up close to things and people to capture to great moments, and nothing says "Ohhh" like shooting a wide cityscape

Here are some examples of the beauty of this lens:

35mm, f/2.8, ISO 6400, 1/6 shutter

Tamron 28-75MM F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)

Review Date: Oct 21, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $500.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Price, price, price. Constant 2.8, light, great image quality if you have a good copy
Slow af, cheaper build compared to Canon, noisier AF

For anyone on a budget and not wanting to spend the Canon L prices, the Tamron 28-75 is a great choice. If you get a good copy of this lens (I did on my 2nd try), the sharpness will amaze you. I rented a the Canon 24-70 and shot some test shots at home. While not scientific, I found the Tamron was sharper at 5.6 and up, the Canon being sharper at 2.8.

The Tamron is lighter than the Canon and costs 1/3 the price. To note though that it is slower to focus in low light. Which can be a problem if you do alot of concerts and such. I shot a dance show with the Tamron and Canon and preferred the Canon's speed of focusing. Not a huge difference, but noticable. It is also noiser than the Canon.

I have shot weddings, portraits, concerts, landscapes with this lens and have not been disappointed (other than the slower AF)

I would recommend this lens to anyone who is looking for a good quality f/2.8 constant lens. I will be buying the Canon when a new 24-70 is released. Why? Because my shooting style has me doing more low light and I will benefit from the few advantages the Canon offers. I will still keep this lens though as it makes a fantastique travel lens due to it being so much lighter than the Canon.

Here are some examples of shots with the Tamron. I dont do much post processing other than basic lightroom stuff as I shoot in raw.

Night cityscape, 32mm , 15s, f/13, ISO 100
Concert (w/ 7D), 67mm, 1/60, f/2.8, ISO 2500

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

Review Date: May 27, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $700.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Low price compared to the 70-200, it is black so not as obvious a steal threat when on vacation, it has a good range up to 300
Somewhat soft at 300

I had a cheap 50-200mm telephoto lens that didn't get much use as I'm not a fan of telephotos, I prefer to be up close. I was going on a 1 month trip to Australia and I knew that having a better telephoto in my bag would be essential.

I was debating between the 70-300, 70-200 f/4 and the 70-200 f/4 IS. The 70-200 with IS was out of my budget range. So the choices became either the 70-300 with IS or the 70-200 without IS. What would I gain with the f/4? I would gain an extra stop of light at the long end, but I would also gain what is considered one of the sharpest telephotos on the market....but it didn't have IS and was 100mm shorter.

So I went with the 70-300 for the range and the IS.

I have been very happy with it as a casual telephoto lens that gives great results for its price. I wouldn't consider the image quality to be L level, but it is up there. It is much better than the third party equivalents and a nice upgrade from the cheaper telephotos Canon offers (75-300, 55-250,..).

I shot a pro soccer match not too long ago and brought both my 70-300 and a friends 70-200 f/2.8 IS and you can easily see how outclassed the 70-300 is, but then, its $700 vs $1800.

As an every day telephoto lens, this is a great buy. The 70-200 f/4 is a great buy as well, for the same price, so it really depends on your needs. Tack sharp? Go with the f/4. IS and a longer reach? Go with the 70-300

Below are a few examples from the Taronga Zoo in Sydney at various focal lenghts.




Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Review Date: May 21, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $850.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: image quality, distortion control, product quality

As far as wide angle zooms for the crop cameras, I have never been happier with my choice to go with the 10-22.

This is probably closest to an L lens without actually being an L lens. The zoom ring is smooth and the image quality is stellar.

I do alot of urban shooting and cityscapes with this lens and it produces great results. I have even done some themed portrait shots requiring some distortion with the wide angle.

I recently purchased a 7D and I was debating going 7D or 5D2 and I stuck with the 7D as I would not be able to use my 10-22 on the 5D2 and it would take me a long while to get the 16-35.

Great lens.

Here are some sample images to show the amazing image quality

Night shot @ 20mm

Cityscape @ 13mm