dccps's reviews

  • Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    Excellent coverage (field of view) for landscape work, excellent resolution, well controlled distortion, neutral color
    price, ef-s only mount

    I just spent 10 days in Japan and visited very impressing temples from Nara to Nikko. The scenery was truly spectacular and the Budhist temples were amazing. The lens I used to capture images ranging from grand scenics, to architecture to candid people shots was the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM exclusively for those 10 days. The shots I came back with are excellent. Resolution is outstanding, color is true, exposures were spot on, and distortion is very well controlled. I debated whether to take other lenses and actually did, but never changed the lens during the entire stay. I highly recommend this glass.

    reviewed November 25th, 2006 (purchased for $680)

  • Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

    8 out of 10 points and recommended
    excellent sharpness and color, constant aperture
    field of view for reduced sensor size (all but EOS 1Ds)

    I used this lens for a few years with an EOS-3 with excellent results. Switching to an EOS-20D, I was less enamored with the field of view. The 1.6 multiplier really takes the wide angle away from typical full frame glas like this one. This issue aside, images with this optic were reliably well exposed, with good resolution and true color. If you can live with the equivalent of a 28-70mm optic (I round off), then this could be a very good choice. Otherwise, consider a wider lens.

    reviewed November 25th, 2006 (purchased for $675)

  • Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    Outstandingly sharp, flare well controlled, relatively light
    slow aperture (f/4.0) is not ideal for some sports

    This lens is an excellent choice for all but night shots at baseball or football games where an F/2.8 would be better. Otherwise images are outstanding with remarkable resolution and excellent color. With it's weight, I don't really know if IS would be a big add to the value of this optic... it's light and easily balances on a 20D.

    reviewed November 25th, 2006 (purchased for $575)

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

    6 out of 10 points and not recommended
    IS works pretty well, image resolution is very good, color is true
    resulution is not as good as "L" glass, falls off at highest telephoto, occasionally locks up camera

    This lens is okay for general shooting if you don't really want or need to go wide, but I typically use other optics much more. I found the range, equivalent to 50-210 (rounded off) less than ideal for shooting for the kind of images I do (landscapes, people in context, architecture... Although I indicate that I would not recommend this lens, it is mostly due to the weak field of view for a reduced size sensor. Images are, typically for Canon, quite definitely good enough to print to the reasonable limits of the sensor.

    reviewed November 25th, 2006 (purchased for $380)

  • Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    superb sharpness, color and bokeh, reasonable price for this quality
    none

    If you are looking for a moderate telephoto lens: BUY THIS ONE!!! Equivalent to a 135mm lens on a dslr, this is one outstanding lens and well worth the money. At f/1.8, it has the speed for virtually any kind of shooting. I'm not sure why Canon also makes an f/1.2 L, but I doubt you will find much reason to spend $1,400 more for a faster lens than a f/1.8 at this focal length.

    reviewed November 30th, 2006 (purchased for $340)

  • Canon EF 35mm f/2

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    normal field of view on a reduced sensor size Canon slr, very good sharpness and color, small and light
    not USM, slight build

    If you are used to a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera, this is about as close as you can get to a "normal" lens. At f/2, its not quite as fast as I would like, but the reduced sensor size of Canon's 30D or 20D etc. really takes advantage of this lens's sweet spot. Small, light, and a good quality optic: qualities that certainly have their place, especially in this price range.

    reviewed November 30th, 2006 (purchased for $225)

  • Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    outstanding sharpness, fast lens, well constructed
    none

    One of the finest telephoto lenses I've ever used. Great on a reduced size sensor, equivalent to a 300mm (rounded off) optic with an f/2.8 aperture. If you want to capture action during an evening football or baseball game, then GET THIS LENS! Much lighter than 70-200 and covers the field of view most will default to anyway.

    reviewed November 30th, 2006 (purchased for $645)

  • Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    great portrait lens on a APS sized sensor digital camera
    could be updated with better USM

    Another winner from Canon. I used to use this as a normal lens on a Canon EOS 3. Now it is an excellent choice for a close portrait lens, much like the use I had for the 85mm f/1.8. I have gotten great photos with the lens and am very comfortable relying on it. Bokeh is great, sharpness, stopped down even one stop is excellent. At f/1.4, results can still be quite good, just remember depth of field is shallow.

    reviewed November 30th, 2006 (purchased for $305)

  • Olympus 11-22mm f/2.8-3.5 Zuiko Digital

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    excellent size and very good field of view, sharp, good color
    cost of Olympus lenses is relatively high

    An excellent lens for scenics and traveling. Small while still fast enough (aperture) for flexible shooting situations. I am still not sold on 4/3rds system... (I use this system, however, when I want good photos and want to travel lighter than with my other SLRs) sensors are too small and noise a bit too high for higher ISOs, but the size and weight of these lenses is a great selling point and the optical quality of this lens is excellent.

    reviewed December 7th, 2006 (purchased for $675)

  • Olympus 7-14mm f/4 Zuiko Digital

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    Really wide angle of view, superbly controlled distortion and chromatic aberation, excellent resolution
    a bit large, front element is too large to protect with a filter

    I have never used a better wide lens - period! I have shot with many name brand optics... none were as impressive as this one - excellent color, razor sharp, well controlled distortion - Tremendous perspectives for architecture and landscapes!

    reviewed March 8th, 2008 (purchased for $1,600)

  • Olympus 12-60mm f/2.8-4 ED SWD Zuiko Digital

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    great range and superb optical quality
    price

    This is a great all purpose lens, equal to a 24mm-120mm optic. It focuses incredibly fast, is razor sharp with great color and minimal distortion. Images are awesome. It is also very well sealed against the elements. I used this in the mountains East of Seattle this past weekend in the snow and very wet conditions - no problem at all. This one will get a lot of use. It couples extremely well with the E-3.

    reviewed March 8th, 2008 (purchased for $1,000)

  • Olympus 70-300mm f/4-5.6 ED Zuiko Digital

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    small and light for such a high telephoto range
    aperture is slower than I would like

    I took this lens out when I spotted dear near one of the vistas off of I-280 southwest of San Francisco. The shots were at dusk and I was worried that handheld, they would simply not be sharp. I was wrong. With the E-3, I was getting sharp images zoomed out to 300mm (equal to 600mm) at 1/60th sec or so. This is great! The shots were sharp and the color was very good. I don't shoot telephoto nearly as much as wide angle but I think I may start shooting more with this lens. Very definitely worth the price on an E-3.

    reviewed March 8th, 2008 (purchased for $399)