Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: Rusty1  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Rusty1 to your Buddy List
Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM

Review Date: Jun 18, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Light, compact, balances like a dream in your hands. Sharp, weathered sealed, IS, fast AF even with the 1.4 TC, image quality with the TC is still quite good.
Very expensive new, only F4 but you know that going in.

Canon EOS 1D Mark II

Review Date: May 26, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,500.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Solid build and weather sealed, long shutter life, fast and accurate auto focus, bright 100% view finder, 8 fps, nice image quality and low noise, good battery life, decent wide with 17-40 lens
A little big and heavy, although balances large lens well, interface can be awkward, silly firewire and poor CF to SD card switching

Bought as a "refurb by Canon" recently. This camera has fast and more importantly accurate auto focus with good tracking at up to 8 fps if needed. APS-H sensor gives very good 8mp image quality and allows the 17-40L to still be reasonably wide. Nice high ISO performance.

My worries as to 17mm being wide enough for what I shoot have been put to rest. Don't think I could settle for the small dark view finder and AF of my 20D again.

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

Review Date: Apr 21, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Versatile range, good color/contrast, Image stabilization, solid build, close minimum focus distance, good balance of price/performance/weight
Slow aperture

Actually for a 4x zoom this is a very good compromise. Excellent color and contrast. Wide open 400mm images with some USM are more than acceptable. I found F8 to F11 to indeed be the sweet spot for this lens. The push-pull zoom is not an issue for me, I like it.

Best used outdoors in daylight. A great choice for baseball, football/soccer, parades, zoo trips, air shows and the like. Lacks the reach and focus speed to be a true birding lens.

Yes it is a slow lens, but remember the Nikon 200-400 F4 zoom while a great lens weighs 7lbs, is 14in long and cost $5,000 usd.

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

Review Date: Jul 20, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Solid L quality build, very sharp, fast focus, wieght & size , standard 77mm filter size, recessed AF and IS butons, ideal zoom range on FF.
Expensive and F4. But you know this up front. For me placement of focus and zoom rings should be swaped.

I'm using a 20D, but bought this with FF in mind for the near future.

Has the color/contrast you expect and get from L lens. Only F4 but its not 3lbs either. The IS is state of the art and for me camera shake is more often a problem than movement blur.

Shot from tripod using timed release the results surprised me. At 24mm F4 it was sharper than my 17-40L. At 50mm F4 it matched my 50mm F1.8 and was only very slighly softer at 100mm F4 than my 70-200F4.

Ideal for FF and works well for me when combined with the surprising 10-22.

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

Review Date: Apr 11, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $639.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Good sharpness, color and contrast, fast and quite focus, light wieght, internal zoom, filter mount does not rotate, CA flare and distortion well controled for this focal range
EF-S mount only, exspensive, average consumer grade build, does not come with lens hood

Can't afford to go FF for awhile and this has the wide angle I'm missing.

Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Review Date: Nov 18, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $239.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Sharp, very good color/contrast, fast focus, compact-light wieght, not exspensive, shares filters with 70-200L/f4
older champagne/siver model not easy to find

Found an older champagne/silver colored one that was originally made as kit lens for the upscale Canon IX APS from 1996 or so. For whatever reason these seem to be better quality than present model.
Sharp wide open with very good color and contrast. 100% crops at 24mm and 40mm F4 compare very well with 17-40L. The L is better but you have to look close. Makes a great companion to the 17-40 and 70-200
One caveat, the first champagne/silver one I tried was no better than current black ones, there are soft ones out there.