Thoughts in the EF 28-105 f3.5-4.5 II USM

[vfilby]

Hi,

I have the efs 18-55 (my copy is pretty soft opened up), the 50 f1.8 and a 75-300 III. All in all, the only usable lens that I have is the 50 because I am shooting with available light. The 18-55 is ok stopped down past f8 but I was hoping for something I could run wide open.

Should I go for the 28-105 (240 CDN used) or hold out for better? Maybe save up for a good quality wide, maybe even L. Maybe I should get some wide primes. I am just alittle lost in what lens upgrade path I should take.

FYI, I get paid for portrait work, I like telephotos for sports etc, and I like wide as well. What do I shoot? Well mainly wide, infact the with the 50 I have to back off quite a bit to get the width (where possible).

Thanks in advance,

[wolf]

Here (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=206&sort=7&thecat=27) are some reviews that you may like to read.

[vfilby]

Hi Wolf,

I have read those reviews and they seem encouraging! I guess I am asking for the opinions from those that own or have owned them. I guess I also want to know if someone thinks I am nuts for going towards this lens when I can start saving and get a nice wide L in a couple months (maybe more).

I just don't want to waste time/money/effort on a lens upgrade path that isn't optimal. PS, I have the kits lens and I know it works well stopped down. The only time I have that opportunity, to stop it down enough that is, is when I am working with studio strobes and that is not often at all.

Thanks for your advice,

[Ballen Photo]

I guess I am asking for the opinions from those that own or have owned them.

Hi Vince, I own that lens, and have had it for probably close to ten years now.
Note; Canon also makes a cheaper version that has no distance scale, and is poorly constructed by comparison. Dont confuse the two.

I like mine, and it makes a good walk around lens for my 10D, and it seems capable of getting decent shots. Dont rule it out.
-Bruce

[vfilby]

I am wondering what 'L' lenses are out there inthe same focal range. The 24-70 seems to be popular but really expensive. I will not be able to afford $2000 canadian anytime soon.

The 28-105 I am looking at is the 3.5-4.5 II USM version. It appears that if I was to go L, the 17-40 would be the only viable option. Which covers me up to 50mm (80ish effective mm). Then maybe I can start saving for the 70-200 f4L. With the 50 stuck in the middle I am sure that I wouldn't worry too much about the missed focal ranges, I do have feet afterall.

On this note can the 17-40 be considered a general use lens? (with 1.6x it is 27-64ish)

[commando]

How about the Tamron 28-75? It gets great reviews (people say it's almost as good as L glass) and it's like $360 with rebate.

[Roy NN7DX]

EF28-105/f3.5-4.5 is a very good lens...

Here are another 93 reviews to add to the Fred Miranda ones listed above... It rates 4.13 of 5 but I'd rate it just a bit higher (4.5?) on my 1.6x crop cameras... I loved this lens on my 10D but it is just brilliant on my 20D!

http://www.photographyreview.com/pscLenses/35mm,Zoom/Canon,EF,28-105mm,USM,f-3.5-4.5/PRD_83414_3128crx.aspx

You can get a large amount of your purchase price returned if you ever sell it again.

Good hunting.

[vfilby]

How about the Tamron 28-75? It gets great reviews (people say it's almost as good as L glass) and it's like $360 with rebate.

Mainly because I think there quality control is poor and that there is a large variance in lens quality. I have seen so many mixed reviews I don't particularly trust them. The people that have the good ones won't sell them used either, so I would have to buy new and I would prefer to keep the cost down with used.

[Tom W]

I'm the proud owner of a 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 USM lens. Despite the fact that I've more recently bought the 24-70L, I won't part with the less expensive 28-105. Why? Because though it isn't quite as nice as the 24-70 and doesn't offer the wide apertures, it is a very sharp lens stopped down a pinch and its light and easy to handle.

Its really one of Canon's best-kept secrets IMHO.

[photography By Evangelos]

The 28-105 II :D not the 28-105 Plastic :x lens mount one is a great lens. I have one and love it. It is small and compact and can be had for a bargain :D it is also USM. I for one like it better than the 28-135 IS lens also it has a larger aperture that the 28-135 IS. I did notice a difference between the two and for me this lens is a great travel lens small and compact and both on optical performance. This is why I sold off my 28-135 IS. You just cant go wrong with this one it is a keeper of a lens and a true gem. I wish I could post images on the forum I have not taken the time to learn :? how to do so. Can some one help me so I can post some images taken with this lens? If not just PM your email and I will forward a few images taken with this lens. It is one of the most over looked canon lenses why I do not know.


Angelo 8)

[photography By Evangelos]

Any one with some help??








Angelo 8)

[Jack W.]

I have the 28-105. Nice and sharp, no complaints here.

[vfilby]

Any one with some help??

Angelo 8)

Upload the images somewhere where they are accessable on the net. Then put the url in url here

[nat869]

I have the 28-105 usm as well. I really like it, it was the general purpose lens I got when I bought my 10D. It is also a nice macro lens. I did recently buy the Tamron 28-75 which I think is a sharper lens, of course faster too, but I doubt I will part with the 28-105. I think it is a great all purpose lens.

[pradeep1]

I have owned this lens for almost 10 years from film days. Back then we did not have the Internet to do research, so I ended up buying it based on playing around with a friend's. I was impressed by it then, but at that time, I had cheap Sigma lenses to compare it to. Over the years, as I have amassed other lenses, this is the lens that stays on my SLR 90% of the time. It is an excellent lens for the price. It has travelled the world with me and captured some of my most cherished photographs. I would recommend this lens to anyone who asks me.

[pradeep1]

I have owned this lens for almost 10 years from film days. Back then we did not have the Internet to do research, so I ended up buying it based on playing around with a friend's. I was impressed by it then, but at that time, I had cheap Sigma lenses to compare it to. Over the years, as I have amassed other lenses, this is the lens that stays on my SLR 90% of the time. It is an excellent lens for the price. It has travelled the world with me and captured some of my most cherished photographs. I would recommend this lens to anyone who asks me.


But now that I have a dRebel XT, I am noticing that it is not as sharp as would like. The lens is still great, but I could go for something better...only wished Canon had a 17-85 L.

[ron chappel]

The 17-40/4l ,50/1.8 & 70-200/4L are an *excellent* long term kit worth working towards!:)
You're right-the small gap between 40mm and 70mm with only the 50/1.8 to plug it is simply not a problem-you won't notice it.

[flyfisher]

I would also recomend this lens to anyone, I have also had this lens from my film days and have used it for weddings many times and it is very sharp.

[Andy_T]

But now that I have a dRebel XT, I am noticing that it is not as sharp as would like. The lens is still great, but I could go for something better...only wished Canon had a 17-85 L.

Pradeep,

take a look at the Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR!
I really love that lens.

Plus, it's the smallest and lightest 2.8 constant aperture lens (might be helpful on the DRXT)

Best regards,
Andy

[james12345]

Hmmm, I too was looking at this lens for my RXT... Keep the opinions coming, they surely do help.