Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: irispatch  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add irispatch to your Buddy List
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM

Review Date: Apr 15, 2012 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,350.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharpness, focus speed IS , size.
Price focus and zoom rings are reversed.

When my 35-350L broke I took a long time trying to decide what to replace it with. The 28-300 is a nice range, a heavy expensive beast. The 100-400 is a popular lens that I have rented twice and both times not really satisfied with the results. I had a 70-300 DO which was nice but not quite sharp enough and for a bout the same price the 70-300 L turns out to be good enough for me to give up my 300F4LIS. A solid performer that has given me sharp handheld shots that usually I would need a tripod to get. finding one on the used market tells you a lot, they just cannot be found used.

Canon EF 35-350mm f/3.5-5.6L USM

Review Date: May 31, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Versatility, Range, Build, IQ
Discontinued, no IS.

I wanted a good zoom since my husband took over my 70-200mm F4 IS, I found a recently Canon refurbished 35-350mm. The push pull aspect is great, since I my old film zoom lens was a push pull it is easy to work worth. Now to test it out. It is about 4 ounces lighter than a 100-400mm, still a little heavy but not so that I could not use it while hiking. First effort I left the tripod in the car... While at times I wished that I had it since there is no IS but then i t forces you to use good technique and not to rely on IS. I was amazed to find that most of my shots was as sharp or far sharper than the 100-400MM lenses that I had tried in the past. Pop it onto a good tripod and it gives very sharp images. Ok I lose 50mm at the long end and I am ahead 65mm on the wide end. Certainly gives me a lot to work with as far as framing. It is a keeper for me.
Not sure why some think the hood is big... it isn't it is a petal hood no longer than on the 70-200 a bit wider because the filter size is 72mm not all that huge It is built like a tank as it should be.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM

Review Date: Oct 30, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $996.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Everything that is great about the non IS version, sharpness, IQ etc. With the IS L version better focus speed with IS the ability to hand hold more shots.
Price. but quality isn't cheap

I have used the non IS version for nearly 2 years and have loved it. My decision to move to the IS L version was due to increasing difficulty with hand holding a 50D with the 100mm non is. This is a physical issue related to arthritis not the set up. I found the lighter weight and supurb balance very helpful in being able to handhold for close-up shots again. High grade plastics very often have better stress and impact resistance than metals ( the exception being the mount system metal is preferred because of the tabs and twisting). Thus by using them in a lens of this sort it allows for a lighter and better balanced lens that works very well with the lighter crop cameras. I have been delighted with the lens. Color, sharpness, IQ etc have been equal to or better than my old 100mm 2.8 non IS.

Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM

Review Date: Mar 6, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $850.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Size, weight, image quality, versatility Telephoto to close up in one lens.

Size packs easily in a carry on or my vest. Weight, light enough to hand hold and carry all day. Image quality is outstanding. After Renting a 100-400 twice and finding them lacking in sharpness and versatility I researched lenses for 6 months looking for something to photograph birds with that was withing my budget. The 300mm f4L kept coming up as a very good wildlife option for a crop camera. Since I like to photograph birds , flowers and insects this lens is ideal for me. The 400mm lacks IS and does not have the ability to perform as a close-up lens too. After a week in Florida I am very happy with the results, razor sharp images, with great color. I may just let the 70-200 F4IS go since this spends as much time on the camera as my 100 F2.8.

Canon EF 20-35mm f/2.8L

Review Date: Oct 7, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $450.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Build quality, sharpness, and color all are excellent. Light weight and compact.
For me None really. No longer in production The Photo quality is what is important. Focus speed is not an issue nor is sound.

Very Sharp and more than wide enough for my use. I was looking for a decent wide that would not break my bank account and still would give me the sharpness I wanted. This little gem fills that requirement to a "T". I was amazed at the color and sharpness. As far as color it beats my 70-200F4 IS L . It is a lens that will see some use.
Focus is fast enough for my use, landscapes do not move and since I am hard of hearing motor sound is not an issue either.
Build, construction, size all make it a very handy lens and the quality you come to expect from an L" ( and sometimes do not get in an "L" )