Archive 2005 · What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
p.1 #1What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
In several reviews I've seen references to a lens nicknamed the "goldfinger"". Somehow this lens seems to be used as a benchmark for comparing other "good value for money" lenses. What lens are the authors talking about? I've seen some people call it a "Tamron Goldfinger" while other sources seem to indicate that this is a canon lens (28-80 USM?) I've seen some say the barrel of the lens itself is champagne colored, but I've only seen black, white and silver Canon lenses... What is this elusive beast, and is it really "that good" of a deal?
-Matt
-Matt
Dec 14, 2005 at 10:03 AM
p.1 #2What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
It could be that CIA Pentax with the gun built into the lens 
Dec 14, 2005 at 10:20 AM
p.1 #3What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
"Goldfinger" is a moniker for the champagne-colored 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM kit lens for some of Canon's older APS SLR film cameras.
Billl
Billl
Dec 14, 2005 at 10:27 AM
p.1 #4What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
It's a Canon lens -- the 24-85 USM specifically -- that was built in two versions. One was black and was available to consumers, and the other was a goldish silver that was sold as part of a camera kit with one of the consumer EOS cameraas.
Rumour has it that the "goldfinger" version is slightly sharper than the non-"goldfinger" version, but I've never seen any comparison images that would indicate (or contraindicate, for that matter) this fact.
Edited by Shivatron on Dec 14, 2005 at 11:29 AM GMT
Rumour has it that the "goldfinger" version is slightly sharper than the non-"goldfinger" version, but I've never seen any comparison images that would indicate (or contraindicate, for that matter) this fact.
Edited by Shivatron on Dec 14, 2005 at 11:29 AM GMT
Dec 14, 2005 at 10:29 AM
p.1 #5What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
I may be wrong, but I think the name was given by AdamT over at another other photo site.
It's the Canon 24-85 that was a kit lens with one of the Canon APS (maybe) SLR's. It is the "Champagne" colored ones you've read about.
http://www.ritzcamera.com/graphics/ritzcamera/products/541160263.jpg
It's the Canon 24-85 that was a kit lens with one of the Canon APS (maybe) SLR's. It is the "Champagne" colored ones you've read about.
http://www.ritzcamera.com/graphics/ritzcamera/products/541160263.jpg
Dec 14, 2005 at 10:31 AM
p.1 #6What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
Ok, thanks for clearing that up 
So, no idea if it actually deserves all of the claims of being a great lens for the money, etc?
So, no idea if it actually deserves all of the claims of being a great lens for the money, etc?Dec 14, 2005 at 12:04 PM
p.1 #7What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
I have a goldfinger now and I used to own the black version. I sent the black one back because the zoom was very loose. The images from each seemed about the same to me.
The goldfinger has produced some digital images with sharpness that surprised me when viewed as actual pixels. I now use it primarily for family events because it doesn't distract people when I point it at them as much as larger lenses.
The goldfinger has produced some digital images with sharpness that surprised me when viewed as actual pixels. I now use it primarily for family events because it doesn't distract people when I point it at them as much as larger lenses.
Dec 14, 2005 at 12:09 PM
p.1 #8What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
Jay,
Would you consider this a good replacement for the 18-55 kit lens that comes with the 300D? I have a 16mm diagonal fisheye to cover any really WIDE shots and a sigma 50-200 if I need extra reach. I'm considering this for my every day walk-around lens.
Thanks again for all of the quick replies!
-Matt
Would you consider this a good replacement for the 18-55 kit lens that comes with the 300D? I have a 16mm diagonal fisheye to cover any really WIDE shots and a sigma 50-200 if I need extra reach. I'm considering this for my every day walk-around lens.
Thanks again for all of the quick replies!
-Matt
Dec 14, 2005 at 12:12 PM
p.1 #9What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
armstrom, My fiancee uses the 24-85 as a walk-around on her Rebel XT and it works very very well. It is far better than the 18-55 kit if you don't mind losing the 18-24 range. The USM is great and it is surprisingly sharp. I would recommend it, especially if you can get it cheap on eBay.
Dec 14, 2005 at 12:29 PM
p.1 #10What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
Yeh its the Silver (well Champagne) version of the 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 USM lens that came with those APS SLR cameras as the kit lens. Its the same as the black model, However some pepole say its a little sharper?
I saw one for sale last week on ebay with the lens hood, If I didden't already have a 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 USM I would have proberlly picked it up as it sold for a good price!
I saw one for sale last week on ebay with the lens hood, If I didden't already have a 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 USM I would have proberlly picked it up as it sold for a good price!
Dec 14, 2005 at 12:44 PM
p.1 #11What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
One of these just went for $170 on ebay. I was trying to bid on it but ran into an error on ebay in the final seconds 
I looks like this goes for ~$230 used from larger stores. That's around the same price as the 28-105 3.5-4.5 USM sells for for new. How do the two compare in sharpness and color saturaton? I had been eyeing the 28-105 for some time and wouldn't mind having the extra reach if it doesn't mean giving up much in terms of quality.
-Matt
I looks like this goes for ~$230 used from larger stores. That's around the same price as the 28-105 3.5-4.5 USM sells for for new. How do the two compare in sharpness and color saturaton? I had been eyeing the 28-105 for some time and wouldn't mind having the extra reach if it doesn't mean giving up much in terms of quality.-Matt
Dec 14, 2005 at 01:11 PM
p.1 #12What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
Im not shure about the 24-85 f/3.5-4.5, But the 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 is pritty good for its price!
I think they are both about the same, Just a case of, if you wan't the longer reach or a wide angle, thats the trade off.
Both are good consumer lenses though.
I think they are both about the same, Just a case of, if you wan't the longer reach or a wide angle, thats the trade off.
Both are good consumer lenses though.
Dec 14, 2005 at 01:15 PM
p.1 #13What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
"Goldfinger" is same design as the black 24-85. I think it comes down to quality control - apparently the QC of Canon has gone down the tubes a bit over the past few years. The goldfingers are all older lenses, and supposedly are all sharp copies of the lens - as opposed to the newer black ones which have greater variance in build quality and sharpness. I had a goldfinger and it was a great lens - had L-like color, good contrast, good center sharpness, and fairly decent edge sharpness. The price of a new black 24-85 makes it an 'ok' deal, but you can find used goldfingers for much cheaper.
Dec 14, 2005 at 01:18 PM
p.1 #14What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
I used to have both at one time and from my experience, the "goldfinger" was no sharper than the "black", but both were very very good for the price (~200 USD).
The colors were great, but I never really liked the "goldfinger" on the Canon digital bodies I had (D60, ID, 20D).
IMHO, the sharpness claims of the goldfinder vs the black one are overblown. I think both are equally good and make an excellent walkabout lens with the digital bodies with 1.6X crop factor. It also has 67mm threads so you can get 70-200 f/4L and share some filters.
I also prefer this to the 28-105.
-- V
The colors were great, but I never really liked the "goldfinger" on the Canon digital bodies I had (D60, ID, 20D).
IMHO, the sharpness claims of the goldfinder vs the black one are overblown. I think both are equally good and make an excellent walkabout lens with the digital bodies with 1.6X crop factor. It also has 67mm threads so you can get 70-200 f/4L and share some filters.
I also prefer this to the 28-105.
-- V
Dec 14, 2005 at 02:44 PM
p.1 #15What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
Matt,
I am not familiar with the kit lens you mention. However, the 24-85 is great walk around lens. I took it on a walk last summer around Pike Street Market in Seattle and got some very nice shots. It was not fast enough inside the Market though, so I switched to a 20mm 2.8. The 24-85 for outdoors and a fast prime like the 50mm f1.8 (for $80) for indoors make a good light-weight pair for general photography on a budget.
Jay
I am not familiar with the kit lens you mention. However, the 24-85 is great walk around lens. I took it on a walk last summer around Pike Street Market in Seattle and got some very nice shots. It was not fast enough inside the Market though, so I switched to a 20mm 2.8. The 24-85 for outdoors and a fast prime like the 50mm f1.8 (for $80) for indoors make a good light-weight pair for general photography on a budget.
Jay
Dec 14, 2005 at 04:03 PM
p.1 #16What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
I have the black version and it is without doubt a cracking lens. I'd love to get a 24-105 f4L, but until finances permit, this baby will no doubt stay on my camera 80% of the time!
Dec 14, 2005 at 04:04 PM
p.1 #17What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
armstrom wrote:
Ok, thanks for clearing that up So, no idea if it actually deserves all of the claims of being a great lens for the money, etc?
Matt,
Adams reviews and claims of a lens performance are very fair, impartial and honest. He is, (or was, I have not been on that forum for quite a while) very well respected. While not a professional "lens tester", Adam manages to get is hands on all kinds of lenses, sometimes multiple copies and run them through the mill.
Personally, I respect his opinion, experience and report 100%.
Kevin
Ok, thanks for clearing that up
So, no idea if it actually deserves all of the claims of being a great lens for the money, etc?Matt,
Adams reviews and claims of a lens performance are very fair, impartial and honest. He is, (or was, I have not been on that forum for quite a while) very well respected. While not a professional "lens tester", Adam manages to get is hands on all kinds of lenses, sometimes multiple copies and run them through the mill.
Personally, I respect his opinion, experience and report 100%.
Kevin
Dec 14, 2005 at 05:43 PM
p.1 #18What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
armstrom wrote:
In several reviews I've seen references to a lens nicknamed the "goldfinger"". Somehow this lens seems to be used as a benchmark for comparing other "good value for money" lenses. What lens are the authors talking about? I've seen some people call it a "Tamron Goldfinger" while other sources seem to indicate that this is a canon lens (28-80 USM?) I've seen some say the barrel of the lens itself is champagne colored, but I've only seen black, white and silver Canon lenses... What is this elusive beast, and is it really "that good" of a deal?
-Matt
Nick named by Adam-T over at dpreview. Mine is well above average for a consumer lens, sharp and has excelent color/contrast. Some theroize quality control was better because it was the kit lens for the then new high priced Canon EOS IX APS.
http://www.camera.canon.com.my/archive/photography/nut/nuts7/index.htm
In several reviews I've seen references to a lens nicknamed the "goldfinger"". Somehow this lens seems to be used as a benchmark for comparing other "good value for money" lenses. What lens are the authors talking about? I've seen some people call it a "Tamron Goldfinger" while other sources seem to indicate that this is a canon lens (28-80 USM?) I've seen some say the barrel of the lens itself is champagne colored, but I've only seen black, white and silver Canon lenses... What is this elusive beast, and is it really "that good" of a deal?
-Matt
Nick named by Adam-T over at dpreview. Mine is well above average for a consumer lens, sharp and has excelent color/contrast. Some theroize quality control was better because it was the kit lens for the then new high priced Canon EOS IX APS.
http://www.camera.canon.com.my/archive/photography/nut/nuts7/index.htm
Dec 17, 2005 at 09:00 AM
p.1 #19What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
Jay Taft wrote:
Matt,
I am not familiar with the kit lens you mention.
Jay
The "Goldfinger" 24-85 was supplied with teh Canon EOS IX APS SLR camera as a Kit lens.
http://emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu/frary/toolbox_images/eos_ix_24-85.gif
http://emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu/frary/toolbox_images/ef24-85usm_silver.jpg
Matt,
I am not familiar with the kit lens you mention.
Jay
The "Goldfinger" 24-85 was supplied with teh Canon EOS IX APS SLR camera as a Kit lens.
http://emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu/frary/toolbox_images/eos_ix_24-85.gif
http://emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu/frary/toolbox_images/ef24-85usm_silver.jpg
Dec 17, 2005 at 09:56 AM
p.1 #20What is this "Goldfinger" lens I keep hearing about?
I don't get it, why don't people spend a couple of more bucks buying 28-75(70) f2.8 from Tamron or Sigma? All three lens are about the same size and weight as so called Goldfinfer yet I heard a lot of good words about those two f2.8s.
Dec 17, 2005 at 11:03 AM