Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM

[kevinliu4]

I recently bought the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 lens for my Rebel XT which I love. I'm looking to replace the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 that came with my Rebel XT with a Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM.

Just wanted some opinions on this lens for everyday use. Don't want to spend more than US$300. I've been told the macro EF 100mm f/2.8 is a lot of fun but that can come later.

Thanks all.

 

[Dark]

I was looking at that lens to replace my Rebel Xt kit lens at well. However I chose to get the 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 USM. Its 309 off of B&H. I just got my 30d today so im pretty pumped.(sidenote)http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=129189&is=USA&addedTroughType=search

 

[kevinliu4]

Thanks and enjoy your new 30D!

Anyone else?

 

[kevinliu4]

Oooh, just read a detailed review of this lens and it seems to be quite average. I looked at the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L but it's way too expensive. I think I will opt for the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 which is a fraction of the price and some people claim it produces even better shots than the Canon.

 

[IlluminatedSage]

yeah dont be afraid of buying tamron or sigma lenses.

they frequently provide great results. also always buy a good UV lens filter.

 

[Abstract]

Make sure you get one of the "good" Tamron 28-75 mm lenses. Some of them come off the assembly line with a bit of a focus problem. QC issues with production of this lens. Don't know why it still happens.

I have a Sigma 24-70 mm f/2.8, and it's excellent. It's not supposed to be as sharp as the Tamron 28-75 mm, but I don't think anything is supposed to be. It's supposed to be even sharper than the Canon 24-70 mm f/2.8L, but that's not their sharpest lens. I'm sure the 17-40 mm is just as sharp as the Tamron, or sharper.

Unfortunately, not only is the quality control a bit of an issue with the Tamron, but it also feels a bit cheap in terms of build quality. That's just my opinion, though. For an f/2.8 lens that goes to 75 mm, it's very light in weight and small, which is a plus in some people's eyes. My Sigma is built like a tank, and weighs as much as a tank. The better option is really up to you, but I like the bigger size of my Sigma. I don't even mind that it's not as sharp as the Tamron. The Sigma is still a very sharp lens, even at f/2.8.

 

[kevinliu4]

How about the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM?

Between this and the Tamron 28-75mm, which one would you want? Assume for now, price doesn't matter.

We're talking quality, versatility and the fact that I now have an EF 50mm f/1.4.

 

[SpankyPenzaanz]

I recently bought the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 lens for my Rebel XT which I love. I'm looking to replace the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 that came with my Rebel XT with a Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM.

Just wanted some opinions on this lens for everyday use. Don't want to spend more than US$300. I've been told the macro EF 100mm f/2.8 is a lot of fun but that can come later.

Thanks all.

the 28-105 is crap get the 100 2.8macro - its my everyday allpurpose lens - its unbelievabley sharp and so fast.

 

[SpankyPenzaanz]

How about the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM?

Between this and the Tamron 28-75mm, which one would you want? Assume for now, price doesn't matter.

We're talking quality, versatility and the fact that I now have an EF 50mm f/1.4.

both of those i tried and still own the 28-135is and mediocre at best

 

[extraextra]

Agreed with the others, mediocre lens. You're either going to have to increase your budget, or go 3rd party if you want a good lens! I'd recommend the Sigma 17-70, it served me well when I had it! I sold it for the 24-70L.