 |
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
|
|
Review Date: Nov 18, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
VERY SHARP, lightweight, not expensive lens, USM, EF lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
not L built.
|
|
|
well, i have this lens with the hood attached (not incld.) for about 2months on my 400d & 40d, and i feel really happy n satisfied about how it works n produce very sharp images (once again, very sharp!) all the way.
i always use it for candid portrait on weddings/other parties.
the range is also suitable. not too far, not too close with the object.
in low light condition, putting the aperture to f/1.8 doesnt make me worried about the quality; not noisy.
the bokeh is also excellent.
so, i recommend this lens for medium-tele portrait (esp.candid) for anyone with (not-so-high)budget.
using this on FF will make things better!
no doubtful, just GO FOR IT !
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
|
|
Review Date: Sep 3, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
good bokeh, price, light, nice for portraiture, good for low-light indoor
|
|
Cons:
|
plastic, noisy, sometimes not accurate focus
|
|
|
well, it's my first prime lens for my canon 400d.
at first, i really like the bokeh it makes, also the f/1.8 that allow u to take w/o flash in low-light rooms.
But then the compensation of that is it's really hard to search the accurate focus, yet it's noisy n creepy.
I use it for certain occassion, not my fave lens, anyway.
But i could rely on this 'tiny' lens for nite-portraits.
For price?
if u have budget to buy a standard SLR, then this one wouldnt 'bother' your wallet, though !
|
|
|
|
|
Tamron 28-300MM F/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD VC AF
|
|
Review Date: Aug 31, 2008
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
all-around, +hood
|
|
Cons:
|
soft, blue-fringing, creeping, noisy & slow focus
|
|
|
Well, this lens is my 1st 3rd party lens, which i bought around 4 months ago.
At first, i thought this could be a walk-around lens, coz of its focal length and quite a light-weight lens, compare with 2lenses u'd bring to get the same focal length.
But then, after i shot plenty of pics, n saw it in my comp, i became frustrated n disappointed coz of the IQ was not as sharp as i expected before.
It's very soft at >200mm --> also cause blue-fringing pic so badly.
For me, i wouldnt use it at 300mm. For 28-100mm is very OK.
For >100-200mm is acceptable.
About the VC, yes it helps u, but not lots. For me, the VC is little bit better than IS of canon 55-250mm.
And though, in my opinion, not to use it in low-light condition (shall to use other lens with f/2.8 or better, even at 28mm)
And this lens is my 2nd copy,after i returned the 1st one,coz of the creeping if on unlocking position. It happens so badly when u bringing it all around.
At first, i didnt know it, i thought it's normal for kinda big n heavy zooms like that. but then,i compared with other copy when i came again to that shop. YES, it was a bad copy of mine!
So, i just returned it n got the new one 1week after.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF]
|
|
Review Date: Aug 31, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $330.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
very sharp, price, +hood, not heavy, good for low-light condition
|
|
Cons:
|
noisy, distortion.
|
|
|
i bought this lens in my country about a month ago.
just got recommendation from someone, to replace the kit lens (canon 400d).
after i tried the lens in certain locations n events, i become very pleased with the IQ it brings. Very sharp images,even in low-light indoors without flash, while the aperture is 2.8.
well, the problems i found from this lens is about the distortion at the widest angle, also from the noise it makes to search the focus, but i think it's still acceptable for me..
(considering the price).
I highly recommend this lens for you who wants to replace the kit lens.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
