DNHayashida
28th of January 2004 (Wed), 11:16
First of all please don't ask me to post example pictures, I have no web space to link to.
My choice for this lens over the Tamron, Tokina or Canon equivalent was due to the 24mm wide end, larger aperture and the price. I am going to use this lens indoors in a gym taking basketball pictures. A 28-70 f2.8 constant aperture would have been better for indoor gym pictures, but I wanted a little more zoom in the range so I could use it more for the outdoors hiking I do. So after looking at all the features I decided that this lens would be a good compromise and cover a lot of the things I wanted to take pictures of.
The lens is quite a bit larger and quite a bit heavier than the kit lens, but there is no getting around that. The larger zoom range and the larger aperture means the lens will be bigger. It’s not so big that I wouldn’t want to take it on a hike though.
The aperture range is 2.8 to 4.5. The aperture is 2.8 at 24mm, goes to 3.2 at 28mm, 3.5 at 35 mm, 4.0 at 50mm, 4.5 at 90mm and of course 4.5 from 90 to 135. In actual use I don’t notice much light fall off until 50mm and it seems to remain fairly constant from 50mm until the extreme zoom at 135. For some reason I get some darker pictures at 135. Nothing a little lightening in PhotoShop can’t take care of though.
I took pictures of a twenty dollar bill at various zoom ranges and apertures and rather than going into all the details I’ll say that the sharpness will not disappoint in everyday picture situations. But, I’m sure the hyper critical sharpness gurus out there will find something to gripe about. I did not run into any front or back focusing problems.
Overall it’s a good lens with a very useful aperture and zoom range that won’t break the bank. Sharpness is very good, at least in the range that unsharp mask in PhotoShop can take care of. Sharpness, colors and contrast are at least as good as the kit lens – that’s all I own at this point to compare it to.
Darryl Hayashida
My choice for this lens over the Tamron, Tokina or Canon equivalent was due to the 24mm wide end, larger aperture and the price. I am going to use this lens indoors in a gym taking basketball pictures. A 28-70 f2.8 constant aperture would have been better for indoor gym pictures, but I wanted a little more zoom in the range so I could use it more for the outdoors hiking I do. So after looking at all the features I decided that this lens would be a good compromise and cover a lot of the things I wanted to take pictures of.
The lens is quite a bit larger and quite a bit heavier than the kit lens, but there is no getting around that. The larger zoom range and the larger aperture means the lens will be bigger. It’s not so big that I wouldn’t want to take it on a hike though.
The aperture range is 2.8 to 4.5. The aperture is 2.8 at 24mm, goes to 3.2 at 28mm, 3.5 at 35 mm, 4.0 at 50mm, 4.5 at 90mm and of course 4.5 from 90 to 135. In actual use I don’t notice much light fall off until 50mm and it seems to remain fairly constant from 50mm until the extreme zoom at 135. For some reason I get some darker pictures at 135. Nothing a little lightening in PhotoShop can’t take care of though.
I took pictures of a twenty dollar bill at various zoom ranges and apertures and rather than going into all the details I’ll say that the sharpness will not disappoint in everyday picture situations. But, I’m sure the hyper critical sharpness gurus out there will find something to gripe about. I did not run into any front or back focusing problems.
Overall it’s a good lens with a very useful aperture and zoom range that won’t break the bank. Sharpness is very good, at least in the range that unsharp mask in PhotoShop can take care of. Sharpness, colors and contrast are at least as good as the kit lens – that’s all I own at this point to compare it to.
Darryl Hayashida