jeffreenz's reviews

  • Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

    5 out of 10 points and recommended
    A lot of optical quality for virtually no cost
    What do you expect for about $50-$70; pretty high CA wide open at widest angle

    I have the version "II" of this lens, which Steve's and DPR appear to think has been tweaked by Canon at the long end for a bit of an improvement in quality. Other than the CA at the wide end, wide open, this is a bargain lens. I find acceptable linear distortion with landscapes, but not with architecture. With portraits, I just move back a bit and use the longer focal lengths. This lens gets a bad rap mostly because its cheap, but that's the beauty of it.

    reviewed December 26th, 2005

  • Tokina 24-200mm f/3.5-5.6 AT-X 242 AF

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    Huge focal range, considering it is a 24mm rather than 28mm; high quality construction
    edge softness, susceptability to flare, pretty fat and heavy

    You can only compare this lens to other wide focal range walk around lenses. This being said, this is the best of the 2x-200mm lenses around. For this type of lens it is very good but compared to less broad focal range lenses, it would be considered softish, especially at the edges. Color saturation is very good. Mine is in Pentax mount.

    The real advantages of this lens over other similar lenses is that it is a 24mm rather than a 28mm at its widest and the 4mm sure makes a difference. Even with a APS sized DSLR this is a more usable lens because it is wider (36mm-38mm, still a wide angle). I found this more compelling that an additional 100mm at the long end offered in the 28-300mm lenses, which is not nearly as dramatic a difference.

    The other reason for getting this lens, over a Tamron, for example, which I replaced with the Tokina, is the quality of constructin. The Tokina is much sturdier, tighter and, I think, less prone to damage with the large front barrel extension typical of this type of lens. I feel that just about any Tokina will be sturdier than any Tamron or Sigma. I have two wide focal range Tokinas [for different camera makes] which I use a lot and a Tamron [28-200mm] which I no longer use because of its less durable construction.

    reviewed December 27th, 2005 (purchased for $235)

  • Vivitar 100mm f/3.5 AF Macro

    0 out of 10 points and recommended

    What is the focal length with the 1:1 adapter?

    reviewed December 27th, 2005