Question 4 Pekka on lens choice.

Hi Pekka.....I've been reading through some older posts and I noticed you were not very fond of the Canon 28-135 lens...I'm wondering what alternative lens you could offer for a first lens...I will be getting a D30 to use the lenses with and I'd mainly like a versatile lens for to use for travel to Manhatten and other cities and for general use...I'd also like to get a 50-1.4 for portraits.

Any help you could offer would be appreciated,

Greg

You can look on Tamron 24-135 or Tokina 24-200 (!!)

Up to now I've been using Tamron 20-40 and Canon 28-135. One week I was shooting under quite severe for digital camera conditions (ocean, beach and so on) and had to change lens quite offen (I needed wide angle to get a beauty views). What was my surprise, when I discovered the blemishes, spots and such crap on my pictures. Looking carefully at the sensor, I found dust, diiferent microscopic spots which I got while changing the lenses. Unfortunately I couldn't mange to clean the coverglass for the sennsor myself and had to send the camera to service. Now I am trying Tamron and Tokina, I've mentioned, to replace Canon 28-135.

My opinion now is: this Canon lens is not so good (apologets of Canon - kill me ) ). I found the pictures, made with this lens, more flat, more cold, more lifeless than ones made with Tamron (on my test only !!)

28 - IS NOT ENOUGH to shoot indoor. Due to 1.6 factor it is only 45 (44.8). And this is not wide at all.

Choosing the first lens in case of reduced budget, buy a lens, buy functionality, rather than NAME.


I tried both Tamron and Tokina (I verified only electro-mechanical-optical parts, not pictures).
They are both built extremly well and reliable (what I can't say about Canon 28-135. For me it looks a bit flimsy), AF is fast and silent (especially Tokina). I would say, they are both operates like USM (some people found its operation even better).


According to www.photographyreview.​com, both have extremely high optical quality, sharpness is equal on both ends of the range.


I made decision to replace my Canon with one these lens. But I have not decide what to choose: either 200 mm of Tokina or better macro features of Tamron.


PS: I have updated my album, added Cape Cod pictures. Welcome to my album:

http://www.fototime.co​m/inv/1ED73EE3A506E52

I use the Tamrom 24-135mm SP as my main lens for the D30. However, the 135mm spec is a bit off. It should be 216mm at 135X1.6=216, it's actually about 180-190 from testing, which relates to a top spec of 112-119mm. That's too much fudge factor for me.

It's their 50th anniversary lens which means, in my mind, it should be an accurate depiction of the product.

In any case it's sharp as a tact, clean, offers vibrant colors, etc. Only a few complaints.

Do these Tamron and Tokina lenses have image stabilization?

Zooms are meant for places where you absolutely can't move or have restricted area where you can shoot from. That's why I have 70-200. When walking around, you have plenty of freedom in movement, and so normal primes will work well - and they will produce better quality than cheaper zooms.

28-135 IS's problem is that it's so unsensitive - you can't decent shutter speeds (to stop movement) in many conditions and in lesser light it's very dim though the viewfinder. And after some experience with it I definitely have decided to avoid all lenses with variable aperture.

What in my opinion is really important is bright viewfinder and ability to get photos in almost any light.

I'd say a very nice first collection would be

Sigma 20 f/1.8
Canon 50 f/1.4
Canon 100 f/2.8 macro

This set would be really versatile as it would give you ability to shoot in natural light, architecture, portraits, details and macro. All those lenses are very sharp. If you would need more reach, you could get 2x extender to 100mm, or get Sigma 180mm Macro instead of Canon 100mm (Sigma's f/3.5 but cheaper). remember that macro does not mean "macro" but it's a great far shooting lens, too.

I'm getting that Sigma 20 f/1.8 soon.

Pekka

Hey Pekka..you get anymore lenses and you'll have to hire a caddy to lug those things around...heheh

I finally agree with you on the 28-135 IS...it does pretty well in light, but if you get even a little dim it's a tough lens. I've got a 50mm f/1.4 on the way..whenever Canon decides to ship them out to the retailers...they've been in short supply since you touted them. You should be getting a commision. I'm new at real photography and had no idea just how many shots are taken in available light over clear light. The 50 1.4 should have been my first choice...I love the 100-400IS and the 70-200 2.8L...gotta lift some weights and build up my strength in my left arm...those babies are heavy.

The Nitwit