 |
Canon EF 28-105 F/3.5-4.5 II USM
|
|
Review Date: Oct 2, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $140.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Quiet focusing USM, good build, colors, range
|
|
Cons:
|
Images seem soft, even stopped down
|
|
|
Maybe it's just my copy, I'm not sure, but I find this lens nothing to write home about. Most all pics I've taken with it seem so-so. I plan to continue to use it on occasion to hopefully determine whether it's a keeper or if I'll sell it.
|
|
|
|
|
Tamron 18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di II
|
|
Review Date: Sep 14, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, built VERY well, good feel, very nice colors
|
|
Cons:
|
Focusing in low light isn't easy with it but it can then be switched to MF
|
|
|
I feel this lens in under-rated here. All I know is that mine is very sharp, especially stopped down. I bought it mostly as a wide lens for outdoor use in daylight, and for this it's very good.
I do not think Sigma is built better - they are both built like tanks in my opinion.
I've also owned the Sigma 18-50 DC, 18-50 DC EX, and 17-70, all great lenses in my book, and the 18-50 DC is another under-rated lens in my opinion.
I've also owned Tamron 24-135, 28-105, 28-75 XR Di, and 70-300. The 18-200 and the 28-75 seem to be the best Tamrons I've used personally.
Am personally very pleased with it, and especially for $100.
|
|
|
|
|
Tokina 12-24mm f/4 AT-X 124 AF PRO DX SD
|
|
Review Date: Feb 17, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $435.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Best dSLR lens I've ever used. Great colors and sharp at most F stops.
|
|
Cons:
|
None really
|
|
|
This is a great lens. I sold mine because I can't really justify owning a lens worth this much. Instead I went for a bargain Tokina lens - the 19-35 "Plastic Fantastic".
I loved the color and image quality the 12-24 made on Canon bodies. Good glass really makes a big difference. I may possibly get another one of these some day and keep it. I don't think many people would be sorry for buying one of these.
|
|
|
|
|
Sigma 18-50mm F3.5-5.6 DC
|
|
Review Date: Nov 11, 2006
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $60.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Pretty good lens. Fast AF. Built better than Canon EF-S 18-55.
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft on certain settings
|
|
|
This is a follow up on another review I wrote of this lens. If I could rate this lens again, it would be higher. I'd give this lens a 7. The comparison test I gave it with a Canon 18-55 may not have been a fair way to test it.
I've used this lens on many outdoors shots in sunny weather and got fairly good results.
I don't think it's a better lens than a Canon 18-55 EF-S lens but it's not a bad lens. the Canon seems to get a tad better IQ.
|
|
|
|
|
Sigma 18-50mm F3.5-5.6 DC
|
|
Review Date: Nov 8, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 2
|
|
Pros:
|
Built well; feels tougher than a Canon 18-55 kit lens
|
|
Cons:
|
Image quality is not good at all
|
|
|
I don't know if I got a "soft copy" of this lens or what but this lens I have is not a good one. I bought it based on reviews here and elsewhere that say it's better than a Canon kit lens. I compared the two yesterday, side by side and the Canon won by a longshot. The Canon was sharp. This lens is not, even when it's stopped down. My first experience with a Sigma lens was not a good one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
