Wojtek's reviews

  • Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    The sharpest of all Canon Macro lenses
    Could be a higher focal length (objects must be ridiculously close to the lens)

    The lens sharpness test is posted on http://pikespeakphoto.com/tests/canonlens_mp-e.html
    This is the best quality macro lens Canon has to offer. The image quality it delivers surpasses Canon's 180 mm macro lens. The only draw-back is the lowest magnification ratio, that is still very high, so that for the objects taller or wider than one inch you must use other lenses. Contrary to a common opinion that you have to have a specialized macro flash, I still got away without it and doing just fine, but I can't imagine not having the software that efficiently enhances the DOF. This is true, however, that the distance between the object and the lens must be low (10cm for 1:1 and 4cm for 5:1), so that a lens with a longer focal length would be much easier to use with an external flash system. It is an excellent choice for a serious macro work.

    reviewed February 28th, 2009 (purchased for $800)
  • Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    Sharp, low in distortions, high contrast
    none

    This is simply the best Canon prime lens that I have tested. Must have if you're serious about portraits. My tests on it are described on http://pikespeakphoto.com/tests/canonlens135.html

    reviewed February 9th, 2009
  • Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    Sharp, low in distortions, high contrast
    none

    This is one of the best zoom lenses I've tested. My test results are posted on http://pikespeakphoto.com/tests/canonlens24-105.html
    Slightly less sharp at 105mm, but not by much.
    It's a great thing Canon bundled it with 5D MkII.

    reviewed February 9th, 2009
  • Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    Fast, sharp and relatively small
    Low contrast

    As far as the sharpness is concerned, it surpassed Canon 400mm f/5.6 'L' lens, especially in the frame center, see the test results on http://pikespeakphoto.com/tests/canonlens400do.html
    However, low contrast makes pictures look somewhat worse than with the f/5.6 lens. Low contrast is most pronounced at f/4. Bundled with 2x Extender one can see sharpness fall out at the frame edges (http://pikespeakphoto.com/tests/canonlens2xtele.html) more than with the f/5.6 lens.

    reviewed February 9th, 2009 (purchased for $5,000)
  • Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    Evenly sharp throughout the frame, good contrast
    lack of IS

    For the image overall quality I'd give it a slight edge over the Canon's 400mm f/4 DO IS USM, however, more versatile is the DO brand, mainly because it has the image stabilizer. Such a relatively slow lens should have IS. The results of my tests are described on http://pikespeakphoto.com/tests/canonlens400.html (click 'back' and check its performance with the 2x Extender, if you like). It performs well with teleconverters. Personally I don't like the permanently attached hood (that darkens edges with some teleconverters), which most of the time adds only on a dead weight.

    reviewed February 9th, 2009 (purchased for $1,000)
  • Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    Small, light, inexpensive and sharp
    Low contrast at wide open apertures

    It is quite sharp, with relatively low distortions but only in 'standard' DSLRs. Low contrast causes impression of less sharpness than it really is. Significant distortions at the edges of full frame cameras. You can see the test results on http://pikespeakphoto.com/tests/canonlens24-85.htm. Very good choice for cameras with APS-C sensors, if lower contrast does not bother you.

    reviewed February 17th, 2009
  • Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    Small, light, inexpensive and sharp at low focal lengths
    Low contrast at wide open apertures

    Actually, I've tested Canon Zoom Lens EF 75-300 mm f/4-5.6 II USM, that has exactly the same optics as this one, but the USM lens is not listed here at all. It's a perfect companion to Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM (price and quality - wise). At f/11 it is very sharp, but the sharpness seems to be lower due to low contrast, especially wide-open. The tests are described on http://pikespeakphoto.com/tests/canonlens75-300.htm, so you can see for yourself how it compares to similar lenses. At 300mm it is significantly softer than below 200mm ranges. As others noted, it's a great lens for the budget savvy DSLR owners.

    reviewed February 17th, 2009
  • Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

    8 out of 10 points and not recommended
    Wide zoom range
    Heavy, expensive, with high distortions on the sides of full frame cameras

    It is a great-looking, well built lens. Full review of the image quality you'll find on http://pikespeakphoto.com/tests/canonlens28-300.htm
    In summary, the image quality is good for cameras with APS-C sensor, but not as good as a combo of small Canon lenses EF 24-85 mm f/3.5-4.5 USM and EF 75-300 mm f/4-5.6 USM, that cover even a larger range of focal lengths, cumulatively weigh twice less and cost 4x less than this single one. If you hate changing lenses and don't mind carrying 3.7 pounds (plus camera weight), and money is not a factor, this lens is right for you.

    reviewed February 23rd, 2009