Canon 28-80 Lenses

[levine2]

Hi!

I am new to this fourm. I have a question about the 28 - 80 Canon 2.8 lens. Can anyone tell me if it is as sharp as the 28 - 70 2.8? I know it is no longer manufactured. I am interested in buying a used one. Last February I took the plunge into the digital world with my purchase of the D30.

Thanks

[droosan]

levine2 wrote:
I have a question about the 28 - 80 Canon 2.8 lens...
Thanks

I don't think there's any such thing.

There are various iterations of EF28-80(or 90)/3.5-5.6. I would avoid them. They are designed to be cheap and light. Optically they are rather poor and focusing is verrry slooow.

On the other hand, there are also the 24-70/2.8 and the 28-70/2.8. These are excellent lenses. Get either if you can afford it, otherwise, go for the 28-135IS, the 24-85, or the 28-105. Or go with prime lenses if focusing speed and image quality is more important than having a zoom. Canon doesn't make any poor prime lenses.

Oh! Do you mean the 28-80/2.8-4.0? According to
http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html it is very nearly as sharp as the 28-70/2.8. If you can get it cheaply and in good condition, I'm sure it would be great. It's an "L" lens. "L" lenses have to be excellent optically, well-built, and fast focusing.

[levine2]

Thanks for the reply. It was very helpful. I recently bought the Tamron 28 - 105 2.8 lens, but was looking at getting the 28 - 80 2.8/4 lens. Also besides Ebay is there a fourm to sell used FD equipment.

[kraterz]

The 28-80L did exist a few years ago. I have used it a little. It is a very sharp lens but suffers from distortion, flare and vignetting. Quite a bit worse than the 28-70L. I would buy it only if it is cheap.

[50/1.4]

droosan wrote:
[quote]levine2 wrote:
I have a question about the 28 - 80 Canon 2.8 lens...
Thanks

I don't think there's any such thing.

There are various iterations of EF28-80(or 90)/3.5-5.6. I would avoid them. They are designed to be cheap and light. Optically they are rather poor and focusing is verrry slooow.

Droosan is incorrect. The first EF 28-80/3.5-5.6 was introduced at the same time as the original Elan. It has a totally different build and is considerably heavier than subsequent 28-80/3.5-5.6 offerings. It was of high quality and tested very highly with PopPhoto.

[d60g3]

levine2 wrote:
Hi!

I am new to this fourm. I have a question about the 28 - 80 Canon 2.8 lens. Can anyone tell me if it is as sharp as the 28 - 70 2.8? I know it is no longer manufactured. I am interested in buying a used one. Last February I took the plunge into the digital world with my purchase of the D30.

Thanks
the 28-80L 2.8-4 is a variable aperture unlike the newer 28-70 which is constant f2.8. The 28-80L has EM-USM ie, there are no mechnaical linkage from focusing to lens. Therefore you cannot focus without battery power. Focusing is pretty slow.
the good points: Very sharp, as good as M 50/2
construction wonderful solid, smooth and well made. Very beautiful cremy bokeh.
I own this lens since my EOS1 and now into digital. only drawback is the 1.6x manification of dslr. effective lens become 45-128mm. Rest assured it will still beat many of todays consumer's lens in quality and sharpness. Ist's a L lens afterall.

[droosan]

50/1.4 wrote:
Droosan is incorrect. The first EF 28-80/3.5-5.6 was introduced at the same time as the original Elan. It has a totally different build and is considerably heavier than subsequent 28-80/3.5-5.6 offerings. It was of high quality and tested very highly with PopPhoto.

I think "Droosan is largely correct" would have been more accurate, and nicer.

I should have been more precise. This is the general group of lenses I was referring to:
EF 35-70/3.5-4.5
EF 35-80/4.0-5.6
EF 28-80/3.5-5.6
EF 28-80/3.5-5.6 USM
EF 28-80/3,5-5,6 II
EF 28-80/3.5-5.6 II USM
EF 28-80/3.5-5.6 III
EF 28-80/3.5-5.6 III USM
EF 28-80/3.5-5.6 IV USM
EF 28-80/3.5-5.6 V USM
EF 28-90/3.5-5.6 USM

I have tried to use many of these over the years and I will say that the ones I have used have been very slow focusing and poor optical quality, relative to anything else Canon offers. These are the black sheep of the Canon family and are the main reason many people have the impression Rebels aren't that great. These lenses are rated rather poorly by photodo.com.

The top of the barrel is EF28-80/3.5-5.6 USM at 3.2. Is this the one you (50/1.4) are referring to? For comparison the EF28-80/2.8-4.0L is at 3.8 which is good for a zoom - almost as good as EF28-70/2.8L USM at 3.9. Photodo's rating method includes sharpness and distortion, (but not glare or falloff, I think.)

I think I remember hearing, now that you mention it, Canon had a good lens in this bunch that had good glass and a good motor. I have never encountered it.

To clarify, with 50/1.4's input, I would say, avoid this bunch of lenses unless you can test the particular one you're getting. (The EF22-55 fits in this group too. Though you might consider it, over any of the above, for a D30/D60/10D if you're desperate and poor, since its faults are somewhat hidden by the 1.6 crop.)

To d60g3:
I am not sure, but aren't the aperture leaves in the camera rather than in the lens in the EOS system? If so, wouldn't bokeh would be a function of the camera more than of the lens?

"... you cannot focus without battery power."
Are you saying there's no manual focus? Interesting. I didn't know there were any such L lenses. Is this lens from the late 80's, before USM?

[50/1.4]

Droosan - Yes, the original 28-80 did much better than those other lenses in PopPhoto's tests. Those tests are not the end all and be all of lens tests, but I do think they have comparative value amongst lenses of similar speeds and focal length. I was able to use one when a buddy bought one with an Elan, I was impressed but ended up buying a 28-105 with an A2E. I've run into various versions of those other 28-80's when people have come to me for advice on buying a better lens and share your opinion of them. The original 28-80 is much heavier, has a more robust build, and "feels" much better than the others, especially the focusing mechanism. I've been told the 35-70/3.5-4.5 had a better build and was optically better than those other lenses, but I have never handled one. I owned the 22-55/4-5.6 and recently sold it to a friend who has a D60 and was desperate for a wider field of view. I complained about its flare control, he thinks the flare (maybe because of the 1.6X crop?) is okay but that it is not sharp. Go figure. I didn't mean to sound blunt, sorry about that.

[droosan]

I haven't handled the 35-70, but I used the 35-80/4.0-5.6 when I first got a RebelXs in the early 90s. I finally figured out the lens was the problem and tried to fix it with the 28-80/3.5-5.6 USM III . I wish I had those years back.

On a whim I got a 50/1.4 and was stunned. I didn't touch a zoom (except when using other people's gear and being reminded how slow, cheap zooms are) for about 4 years. I now have a 28-105 and I like it well enough for a children's party etc when one camera with a zoom is the simplest way to go. Most of the time though still, the 24/2.8(indoors) or the 200/2.8(sports) is on my EOS3.

I haven't gone digital yet because I am not ready to spend several thousand dollars to go to a poorer picture-taking experience than my 3 gives me. But I have been watching the digital scene with a great deal of interest since the D2000. I think I will finally make the plunge this summer with the 10D. Unless an EOS3D comes out that is near full-frame at a price I can convince my wife of. "Just think, honey, of the development costs this $3000 camera will save."

[levine2]

Thanks Guys. The feedback was most helpful. I ordered a use one that I can try for 14 days. What can I lose. I am what you call a Canon purist. The Tamron is good but just so darn heavy.

[Greg M]

droosan wrote:

There are various iterations of EF28-80(or 90)/3.5-5.6. I would avoid them. They are designed to be cheap and light. Optically they are rather poor and focusing is verrry slooow.

-->

I recently put together a couple of comparison shots using different lenses at f4.5 and f8 for a post on another forum. My wife has a Rebel with a 28-80 3.5-5.6 II so I included it in the test. I was very suprised at how well it did. It is not as horrible as people make it out to be.

[droosan]

levine2 wrote:
I ordered a use one that I can try for 14 days.

Which lens did you order? And where did you order from? I would like to know where I could get used lenses to try for 14 days?

[levine2]

I purchased it through Adorama. There return policy is 14 days if not what you expected. They offer a 100 day warrenty on the product.

[droosan]

levine2 wrote:
I purchased it through Adorama. There return policy is 14 days if not what you expected. They offer a 100 day warrenty on the product.

Thanks, I'll look at them. Which lens did you purchase?

[levine2]

I bought the Canon 28 - 80 2.8 L series lens. Also They had the 10d
cameras in storck as of Sunday.