Gear notes for gallery: Burgundy

   CAMERAS USED FOR THIS GALLERY   

Canon EOS D60 Digital SLR

Purchasing a digital SLR is not an easy decision. This is mainly because of the price, of course, but a traditional photographer, it also changes a lot of things, especially in post processing. One of the things I like best in digital is the endless experimentation possibilities at no cost. Another is the ability to see and edit pictures on a computer immediately after coming back home without having to wait for the slides to be ready or even to scan them. In this generation of SLRs, digital also means a crop factor. While it is painful with a 20mm, it is really an interesting feature with a tele lens, even at the risk of blurry pictures because of heavy shake. At 480mm EFL (effective focal length), hand holding and getting sharp pictures is not easy. There are two things I do not like about digital in general and in this camera: the ability to burn light areas and the fact that color temperature adjustments never seem to give the proper results. Apart from this, it is really a nice tool.

Canon EOS 30

Set in the middle of the Canon range, this camera takes the best of the professional and amateur ranges. By reading its features chart, one might think it is not much different from the "amateur" range cameras under it (the EOS 300 series), but in fact, it really feels different. It is heavier, has a metal mount, is partially built of metal, and it looks far more "professional", while still being lighter than the EOS 3. While the EOS 300 series cameras chooses many parameters automatically, the EOS 30 gives you the choice to do it manually, and is intuitive enough to be mastered easily. The EOS 30 is said to be one of the quietest Canon cameras since the EOS 100. It was true for our copy at the beginning, but it changed when I tried to clean the mirror manually. Not a very good idea. The light metering system is very reliable and has almost never failed me, a world of difference with the D60. Same thing for the AF system. With the EOS 30, I have followed rather small birds in flight, while the D60 failed pitifully on a great blue heron! Of course, nobody's perfect and the EOS 30 would benefit from a more sturdy backdoor, a true spot metering or exposure compensation by third of IL instead of half, but I really love it and still use it despite having made the big jump to digital.

   LENSES USED FOR THIS GALLERY   

Sigma 20 f/1.8

I don't remember why I got interested in a 20mm lens. I was probably looking for something significantly wider than 28mm. I then narrowed my choices to a small series of lenses among which the Canon 20mm F/2.8 USM, the Sigma 17-35 F/2.8-4 and this lens. I chose it over both of these lenses because of the price and the closer focusing. I quickly came to love the wide field of view it brings, the clear and sharp images it produces. The close focusing enables striking effects as does the depth of field. What I really do not like on this Sigma is its slow and noisy focusing. I use MF all the time with it. It's a pity Sigma did not make an HSM version, though it is not that important for a wide angle.

Check this lens out on

Canon 70-200 f/4L

This lens is the best of two worlds. It is almost as good as the 70-200 F/2.8L used by pros, but it is half its price and weights 700g instead of 1400. I was greatly pleased by the sharpness of the first photos I made with this lens. It is sharper than my Sigma 4/300 tele, which is surprising as fix-focals are generally better than zooms. The only problem I have with it is its focusing distance. 1.2m is a bit too far for me sometimes. 70cm would have been perfect. The Canon white L lenses are really a different world. If only Canon could make them ALSO in black!

Check this lens on

Canon 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS

I purchased this lens as a replacement for my 28-200 Tamron. I got it secondhand as I felt its "normal" price was a bit exaggerated (I still think it is). This lens is clearly superior to the Tamron, despite having less range. It focusses rather fast and quietly, thanks to USM. The image stabilization is very handy and enabled me to use 100 ISO film, which was sometimes a problem with the Tamron. It is also sharper and less prone to flare. Of course, there are a couple of things I regret. Despite being far cheaper, the Tamron was better built, with metal parts, while the 28-135 is all made of cheap plastic. It also seems to me that it showed less distorsion at 28mm (or I had never noticed it).

Check this lens out on

Sigma 300 f/4 APO Macro

I chose this lens over a Sigma 135-400 and I was glad I made this choice at the time. The 135-400 is said to be very good at 300-400mm, unlike many telezooms, but it is also slower (F/5.6), not HSM and it cannot focus at less than 2 meters. Its characteristics made the Sigma 4/300 APO an obvious choice, but I had trouble finding one as it was already discontinued in Europe. I then found an HSM version for a reduced price. Although Sigma states that HSM lenses have no problem with the EOS 30, I could not use it at any aperture except F/4 at the beginning. I had to have it fixed by Sigma. The other nitpick I would have about this lens is that it loses AF with Sigma's x1.4 TC, which I purchased thinking it would be better and more adapted than the Kenko or Tamron! Anyway, this lens has great optics and its close focusing abilities make it interesting for making close views of small animals (frogs, lizards, grasshoppers)

Back to the gallery: Burgundy