Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: lunacat  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add lunacat to your Buddy List
Tamron 18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di II

Review Date: Mar 23, 2014 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 1 

Pros: None
- No durability - Not so good for its price

I did not own this lens but one of my family member did foor less than a year. Indeed, even if the quality was not wonderful, even taking really great care of the gear did not prevent it from the lenses inside to move (it never fell or whatever) and gave a total ly blurry image. Therefore, this person soon after switched to another lens, not from this brand.
Maybe Canon or Nikon are more expensive brands, but at least you know you can keep your lens for a long time. And from a long time, I need more than 1 year for sure!
So sometimes, it's better to pay more at first but to be sure you won't have any problem afterwards. That's why I use Canon lenses on my gear and I've never had such problems:

Canon EOS 5D Mark III

Review Date: Feb 17, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: One of the best camera I've owned. Great AF at last!
Its price. Still some problem when focusing in low-light situations but always better than the 5DII...

After working a lot with a 1D III, mostly for sports, I wanted to have a higher MP and better low light management. I went for the 5DIII as the 5D II was a real no-go for me because of the bad AF.
I am really happy to be now shooting weddings with this camera, as you can see on my website:

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

Review Date: Jan 22, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 


Wonderful lightweight prime lens with beautiful bokeh. It is quite sharp and I love using it for portraits. You can see some photos taken with it on my blog:

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

Review Date: Jan 22, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 


I have bought this lens for landscape photography 3 years ago and it's one of the lenses I hahve always on my camera. The build quality is wonderful for its price and I love the fact that you can use the same screw-on filters as the 70-200mm. A lot of people are wondering wheither or not to buy the 17-40 or the 16-35mm. I had wondered myself but I really could not afford the difference in price and also the change in the filter diameter on the 16-35, which would have meant for me to buy other filters, therefore more money spent for the 16-35.
Therefore, for landscape, it's a wonderful lens and I love using it on travels.

I've for example used it during a trip in Ney Zealand and I really enjoyed this great lens for landscape photography:

Canon EOS 1D Mark III

Review Date: Jan 13, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 


This camera is my first 'real' camera and I must say I have struggled finding what would be the best camera for a good price. Indeed, I wanted to shoot sport while still being able to shoot weddings in low light situations. 5D Mark II was quite a good choice at that time for weddings but the AF problem was too big of an issue for fast-moving sports (football here). I tested the 5D II and really saw big problems with the AF right away. The 7D was also a great alternative but I could not like the way the noise was wasting the pictures.
I was not really into the highest MP count so the 1D III was also an option I did not let behind. I would have also considered the 1D4 but the price tag was too high for me.
With its AF problems, the 1DIII really gave good price for what it is, considering you just take care about wheither the body you get is in the problematic series.
In the end, I got a second-hand body which was not in the problematic series and anyway taken to customer service to check any AF problems.

This camera is really a great 1D body for a wonderful price tag. I would never trade it for another body because the MP count is enough for my photos, I love its noise and it gets high enough in the ISO for what I need.

Some arena football (european style) shot with this camera:

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

Review Date: Jan 13, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 


A great lens if you need a good focal range without having lots of lenses in your bag. This would be to me a great travel lens for anything. You're able to get great landscapes with quite a wide angle on a full frame with still the ability to get interesting portraits at a longer focal.

The only problem could be because of the f/4 that may be not so interesting in low light situations.

An example of using this lens on travel without standing out so much of the crowd:

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

Review Date: Jan 13, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $90.00 | Rating: 10 


When starting out in photography, it is the first lens I recommend to beginners. Usually, we would suggest to have a 50mm on a full frame, which not actually the case for most beginners that mostly use APS-C instead of full frame when they start.
Therefore, we should theoretically begin by buying a 35mm lens instead of a 50 mm.
Anyway, I have loved using this lens when I first went into photography. This helps understanding depth of field with the 1.8 aperture, which would be more difficult to see with a kit lens opening at 4 or 5.6 maximum.
Last thing, this lens is so cheap it would be a shame not owning it! I used it a lot for food photography and even portraits at weddings (I own the 1.4 equivalent now):