silverbluemx's reviews

  • Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    Inexpensible, light, small, very sharp stopped down, center sharpness wide open enough for portraits.
    Poor build quality, average AF, very bad corners wide open.

    This is the lens that brought be in the world of primes.
    Compared to the kit zoom, its wide aperture allows for wonderful low light shots and DOF control.
    Beeing quite soft wide open (especially in the corners, but it may not be a big problem for portrait shoots with the subject in the center) it becomes really sharp over 2.8, and incredibly sharp over 5.6.
    On a DSLR its equivalent focal length isnt sometimes wide enough, but quite useful for close portraits.
    The only drawback is the really poor build quality : plastic mount, small autofocus ring... It really gives the feeling of a cheap lens.
    Anyway, it's the most wonderful cheap lens ever!

    reviewed January 4th, 2007 (purchased for $90)

  • Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

    5 out of 10 points and recommended
    Small, light, quite good stopped down, inexpensive as a kit lens.
    Not really sharp under f/8, some distorsion, poor AF, poor construction quality.

    As a kit lens, it performs well if you don't expect too much and are aware of its limitations.
    It is sharp if you have enough light to stop it down to f/8, and the distorsion at 18mm can be corrected during post-processing.
    Apart from image quality, it lacks in build quality : full plastic, front lens rotates during focussing.
    This lens allows you to take great shots if you are on a budget, but if you're not, you'd better choose a better "small everyday lens" such as the Sigma 18-125 for exemple.

    reviewed January 4th, 2007

  • Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

    7 out of 10 points and recommended
    Sharp, good build quality, IS is efficient.
    Cant replace the kit lens because 28mm is too long on a DSLR.

    I've had this lens quite a short time, because I found that the Sigma 18-125 was a lot more convenient than the 18-55 + 28-135 couple, but after some tests I think that it can be a great lens if you don't need wide angle on a DSLR.
    Image quality is quite good wide open at 28mm, but needs to be stopped down a little at the long end. I found the colors to be a little different than those from my other lenses but I liked them.
    The Image Stabilisation is efficient, I've been able to shoot sharp pictures at 1/30s at 135mm (more than 200 equiv.).
    Build quality is good, I never experienced zoom creep on my copy.
    I have never tested its EF-S equivalent (17-85) so I can't say how it compares with it.

    reviewed January 4th, 2007 (purchased for $350)

  • Canon EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM

    6 out of 10 points and not recommended
    Long focal range, light.
    Not really sharp, poor build quality.

    This lens can be useful if you need a long focal range, especially on a DSLR (160-480mm equiv).
    However, I can't say I've been happy with it.
    Build quality is poor (it is subject to lens creeping), and it lacks in contrast and sharpness, and sometimes you can't stop it down because of its long focal lenght and lack of IS.
    For this price, the Sigma 70-300 may be a better alternative.

    reviewed January 4th, 2007

  • Canon EF 135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    Sharp, light, nice soft focus effect, relatively sharp.
    A little too long on a APS-C DSLR

    For its price, this is a very good lens.
    Sharpness is good even at 2.8, and the soft focus gives a dreamy effect to your pictures (but I guess you can have it with software too).
    On a APS-C DSLR, its 200mm equivalent focal lenght is a little too long for portraits, but then is perfect for sports.

    reviewed January 4th, 2007

  • Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    Very useful zoom range, reasonable image quality, correct build quality, price.
    Distorsion at the wide end, softness at the long end, some AF problems at 18mm.

    I bought this lens to replace the kit lens of my EOS 300D, and it outperforms it in every domain. This focal range is extremely convenient as a walkaround lens and perfectly suits my needs (but I'd love a wider aperture too...).
    Image quality is good wide open under 70mm, and sharp on the whole focal range when stopped down to f/8, but is never "excellent" and sometimes lacks some contrast.
    Build quality feels good (I like the material of it, and its weight gives a good feeling) but it is subject to zoom creeping when held almost vertically, especially with the hood on.
    AF operation is fast enough, and not too noisy, but I found it to be sometimes inaccurate at 18mm. This problem dissapears when I use the center AF sensor only (not a big deal for me).
    The lens hood is supplied with the lens and is very convenient, though beeing shaped to fit the FOV at 18mm it becomes less efficient on the long end.

    So, this lens is a very good walkaround/vacation lens for APS-C DSLR and its price makes it very attractive too.

    reviewed January 4th, 2007 (purchased for $240)

  • Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    Very fast (aperture) standard lens for APS-C DSLR, HSM, good build quality.
    A little heavy and large, soft at full aperture.

    This lens is the perfect standard lens for an APS-C DSLR.
    It has a useful equiv focal lenght (~45mm), a large aperture (1.4), a good ultrasonic focus motor and is well built.
    At full aperture, this lens is quite soft, and the corners are a bit disapointing even at f/5,6. But this softness isn't really a problem when you consider the fact that this wide aperture allows for low-light shots that are simply impossible with any slower lens (or they would require flash). In event shooting, this lens at f/1.4 and ISO 1600 open incredible possibilities.
    Build quality is very good, the lens feels solid in hand, maybe because of its weight. About the weight, I think this lens is a little bigger and heavier than what we would expect from a 30mm, it comes maybe from the HSM motor.
    Because of this HSM motor, focussing is fast, silent, and full-time manual focussing is convenient.

    In conclusion, a very good lens for low-light photography. With it, you will hardly ever need your flash!

    reviewed January 4th, 2007 (purchased for $340)

  • Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    Very good performance over f/2, better build quality than EF50/1.8
    Very soft at f/1.4, no ring-type USM

    Compared to my EF 50/1.8, I found this lens to have a better construction quality (not very hard), and a slightly better image quality (with the same aperture).
    However, at full aperture it is worse than the cheap 50/1.8 but the speed gain might be useful, so why not.
    I wish it had a "true" ring-type USM motor like the EF85/1.8.
    I didn't think it was worth the update from my EF50/1.8, but that doesn't mean it's not better.
    Anyway, it's a great lens, but avoid full aperture shots unless you really need the speed of f/1.4.

    reviewed January 8th, 2007

  • Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro

    5 out of 10 points and not recommended
    Cheap, kind of macro mode, light
    Quite soft, macro switch

    This is a average zoom for a small price.
    Image quality is good from 70mm to about 150 when stopped down, but I couldn't get sharp pictures at 300m even at f/8 (and you need a lot of light to keep shutter speed high enough).
    The macro mode can be useful but is not really easy to use : you have to be at the long end to switch to macro mode and then you're locked, you can't switch to normal mode unless you focus to something far away... not really straightforward.
    Build quality isnt that bad for the price.
    If you want a zoom in the 70-300 range, try the APO version instead, it is quite better.

    reviewed January 8th, 2007

  • Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM APO

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    Light, fast, 50-150 range is more than 70-200 equiv, construction.
    Front focussing issue on my 300D, a little soft at 150mm wide open.

    I had the occasion of shooting tens of pictures in a store with this lens and my 300D.
    On many test shots i found that the lens front-focussed at any focal lenght. On the point where it was actually focussed, it was very sharp at f/2.8 from 50mm to about 135mm and then slightly soft at 150mm.
    At f/4 and above, sharp everywhere (at least in my test conditions).
    Build quality is very good, and as an equivalent of the 70-200/2.8 it is quite small and light, has a nice shape, and focusses silently and fast enough.
    Focal range is nice : 50-150 on a 1.6x cropped sensor means the same field of view as an 80-240 which is more than the big and heavy 80-200 for full frame.
    On a price point it is a good alternative to the 70-200/2.8 non IS and also it is wider.
    I think that on more recent bodies (such as the 400D or 30D) with more advanced autofocus than my 300D the front-focussing problem will go away, so it's a very good choice for those in my opinion.

    reviewed January 11th, 2007

  • Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro APO

    7 out of 10 points and recommended
    Cheap, macro mode, light
    Macro switch.

    This is an average zoom for a small price.
    It is certainly better than the non-APO version.
    Image quality is good from 70 to about 150mm wide open, and on the whole range when stopped down (I said good, not excellent).
    The macro mode can be useful but is not really easy to use : you have to be at the long end to switch to macro mode and then you're locked, you can't switch to normal mode unless you focus to something far away... not really straightforward.
    Build quality isn't that bad for the price, and this lens is not very heavy, it is only a bit long when fully extended.
    If you want a zoom in this focal and price range, choose this one over the non-APO version., it is quite better.

    reviewed January 14th, 2007

  • Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC

    7 out of 10 points and recommended
    Very useful zoom range, reasonable image quality, correct build quality, price.
    Distorsion at the wide end, softness at the long end, 6.3 max aperture at 200mm, some AF problems at 18mm.

    I own a 18-125 and had an occasion of comparing it with my friend's 18-200.

    The only difference is that this one has a longer reach, but the 6.3 max aperture is quite slow (to be honest, I usually stop mine to f/8 when I have enough light, so I wouldn't actually notice the slower max aperture). Image quality is pretty much the same at the same settings, so here is a copy of my review of my 18-125/3,5-5,6 :

    "I bought this lens to replace the kit lens of my EOS 300D, and it outperforms it in every domain. This focal range is extremely convenient as a walkaround lens and perfectly suits my needs (but I'd love a wider aperture too...).
    Image quality is good wide open under 70mm, and sharp on the whole focal range when stopped down to f/8, but is never "excellent" and sometimes lacks some contrast.
    Build quality feels good (I like the material of it, and its weight gives a good feeling) but it is subject to zoom creeping when held almost vertically, especially with the hood on.
    AF operation is fast enough, and not too noisy, but I found it to be sometimes inaccurate at 18mm. This problem dissapears when I use the center AF sensor only (not a big deal for me).
    The lens hood is supplied with the lens and is very convenient, though beeing shaped to fit the FOV at 18mm it becomes less efficient on the long end."

    So, this lens is a very good walkaround/vacation lens for APS-C DSLR and its price makes it very attractive too.

    reviewed January 14th, 2007

  • Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical IF SP AF

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    Sharp, a bit wider than 18mm, light and small
    Some AF problems.

    I had the occasion of testing this lens in a store on my EOS 300D.
    I found that the maximum aperture setting is very usable, quite sharp on the whole focal range.
    Also the 17mm position on this lens is really a little wider than the 18mm on my Sigma 18-125, it is not a fake spec.
    I only think that it could be a little longer, maybe up to 70mm, but it would certainly lose another advantage : this lens is quite small and light.
    Build quality is good, not top level but quite high given the price and specs.
    The only drawback : AF. It is a little slow (nothing dramatic), but too noisy for me. I also experienced some hunting even in good light (maybe a problem with my 300D only?)
    Finally, I think that it is a very good choice for those who want to replace their kit lens with the same focal range but a lot better IQ without spending a lot of money.

    reviewed January 14th, 2007