nikoskard's reviews

  • Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    Sharp, LightWeight, Excellent Build, Inner Focusing/Zooming, Suberb Value For Money
    None so Far

    This Lens show exactly how Lens in this price range, and far, should be.

    Excellent build, very smooth control, and excellent image quality.

    Highly recommended. Can't go wrong with this piece of equipment.

    reviewed November 14th, 2006 (purchased for $760)
  • Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    Well Build, IS works perfect, colors.
    Not as sharp especially in corners, as Tamron 28-78

    Excellent build quality, IS is a dream to work with and nice colors.

    Not as sharp in corners, when compare to Tamron 28-75, but sharp overall. Smooth control, even with little strange for me position.

    Very useful range, and finally i thing a perfect pair to 70-200L f/4 and 17-40L f/4.


    reviewed November 14th, 2006 (purchased for $1,200)
  • Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    LightWeight, Cheap good image quality
    mid sharpness, plastic (ok for this price range), AF

    Cheap, fast (f/1.8) lens and thats all. Not quite sharp until stop down and plastic construction.

    Sure you can't wait more in this price range, but if you need fast lens with nice IQ, you better look else.

    OK! for rest of us.

    reviewed November 14th, 2006 (purchased for $100)
  • Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro 1:1 SP AF

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    Sharp, True Macro, Light Weight, Price.
    Feel not quite well build, extend a lot for 1:1 macro, Loudy AF mode

    Very Sharp, true Macro Lens. Well Build, although, not feel like.

    Not so smooth control, but defenetlly a superb IQ. Sharp from Center to Corners with high Contrast and well flare control.

    The only thing i would like to have is inner focusing, especially when shoot macro life.

    Highly recommended, but also have a look in Sigma 150 and Canon 100/60.

    reviewed November 14th, 2006 (purchased for $500)
  • Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical IF SP AF

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    Very Sharp, Good Price, Lightweight, good build quality.

    Great Value for Money, and to be fair, can't beat for 2-3 times more expensive lens.

    Great Sharpness, especially from f/4 upwards and all the way from center to corners.

    Great Contrast, Natural Colors.

    I wish it was better build, but then it would be an L lens......

    Highly Recommended.

    reviewed November 16th, 2006
  • Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    Nice build Q, Weather Sealed, Internal Focus, Light Weight, extremely fast focus.
    None so Far.

    Well pair for F/4 series. I also use 24-105, 70-200 (non is) and now this one for comlete L f/4 series Glass.

    Why Canon don't make an IS version of this lens?

    Contrast, Color, Sharpness is on L side.

    Highly Recomended, if you can't afford 16-35L f/2.8.

    reviewed December 23rd, 2006 (purchased for $750)
  • Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    Lightweight, small, cheap, good IQ for Price.
    Need small aperture to give good iq, toy build

    I bought 300D KIT with this lens as my first dslr. I was very happy with IQ in my photos as long as i was at my first steps.

    After bought tamron 28-75 it begun obvious the limitation of this lens. Not so sharp, slow focus speed, not so good build quality. But for beginners is a must lens cause it's so cheap.

    Of course this can't even close to L but this is not fair comparison. I must admit now it lies in my bag for long time, but i have Tamron 28-75, 24-105L, 17-40L, 70-200L, 50 and Tamron 90 macro, so it is very difficult to shoot with 18-55.

    Overall good results, as long as you are on beginner side.

    reviewed December 26th, 2006
  • Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro APO

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    Good lens for money, nice feel of quality, LightWeight.
    Soft at 300, slight soft at 200, slow autofocus, needs light.

    It was my first tele lens, and i enjoyed using it. Don't wait miracles, but for this money it is a bargain.

    I switch to 70-200L now and i sell my sigma but i really liked it. It has by no mean the IQ of L glass but you know what to expect for the amount you paid. And for the money is a lot of glass.

    Be careful with the light that lens need to make good photos. Also have in mind that it is difficult to focus in average light conditions.

    If you are in low money and want a telephoto go for it. It is the best you can buy for the money.

    reviewed December 27th, 2006 (purchased for $250)
  • Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM APO Macro

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    Very Well Build Quality, Silent AF operation, Sharp, Accesories (case&Tripod mount)
    Nothing so far

    I am very happy with this kind of glass. It is very sharp, same compared to Tamron90, and much more silent.

    It is inner focus operational, so you will not afraid of been captured by your creature while you are trying to focus on it.

    The second thing i like very much in par with tamron is the 150mm. Combined with the inner focus and you have a winner.

    I much prefer this lens, although i will not give my legendary Tamron 90mm. But for macro, wild life job it is the best you can get.

    highly recommended.

    reviewed January 14th, 2007 (purchased for $600)