 |
|
|
argyllphotos
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 30, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 3, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Good range. Silent and quick focus. Minimal vignetting at 28mm full-frame. Light. Cheap.
|
|
Cons:
|
Would like an extra few mm wider. Would like it to be internal zooming (extends in two places)
|
|
|
I used this lens extensively when I had a 10D, then sold it to fund a 17-40L. Then I bought a 5D. Can't afford a 24-105 f4 L so bought this. Not disappointed. In fact, I'm trying to find faults to justify to myself the 24-105 but without success! It's a great little lens, sharp when stopped down, with good vibrant colours. Very much a Cinderella!
|
|
 Nov 3, 2006
|
|
Fabian Fidalgo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 30, 2006
Location: Argentina
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Oct 30, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $250.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great Colors, Good Focus, Sharp ,Quiet and Solid Construction
|
|
Cons:
|
Some CA at 28, not the best focus at low light condition
|
|
|
I have the 1st version not the II
The lens is really great, the colors are great, the reds explodes, basicly are warm colors.
Sharp in most of condition, not like my 50mm 1.4 but very closer.
Quiet, quiet, quiet.
The price is incredible for this great lens.
Very Solid build.
Min distance of focus in 50 cm, but in macro (only in manual focus) are 10 cm aprox.
all Canon users must have.
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2006
|
|
MenulioTiusis
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 11, 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 17
|
|
Review Date: Oct 11, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Litght, sharp, good contrast, FTM USM
|
|
Cons:
|
3.5-4.5, too expensive....
|
|
|
I've used these lens for a month or so (I borrowed it from my friend)...
Overall impresion is great. I really liked it... Though a bit wider would be nice (1.6x crop)... The bad thing- I can't afford it...
|
|
|
Oct 11, 2006
|
|
al juniarsam
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 12, 2006
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 12, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
lightweight, quick focusing, sharp results at range 50-100 mm, good enough for potraiture photography
|
|
Cons:
|
not wide enough if take a landscape image especially for 1.6x cropping camera such as 20D, 30D, and rebels. not sharp enough for the widest focal length (28 mm) and the full zoom (105 mm)
|
|
|
Good lightweight lens for travelling and hiking instead of bringing heavy weight lens. I have been using this lens during 3 years in my analog (Canon EOS Elan 7e) and digital (Canon EOS 10 and 30D) cameras, and the results overall are good enough, both in positive film (velvia) and RAWs. In my opinion this lens is useful enough for taking all kinds photography eventhough not good enough for macro and tele zoom photography. Love this lens. rgds, AL
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2006
|
|
veroman
Online
Image Upload: On
Registered: Aug 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 3507
|
|
Review Date: Aug 24, 2006
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
• Very sharp
• Very good color
• Very good contrast
• Fast AF
• Well built
• Light weight
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
I've reviewed this lens before and gave it a 9. But that was before I owned a Kodak SLR/c, Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II and 1D. The Kodak, in particular, is totally unforgiving when it comes to lenses. A lens you might have thought to be good to excellent might not be so on the Kodak. Indeed, it may turn out to have some pretty serious flaws that other cameras do not pick up on.
Not so with the 28-105. This lens performs superbly on the Kodak. On both the Kodak and my 1D, the lens is even sharper than I thought.
The motivation for this 2nd review is another review here where the poster says this lens is sharper than the newer 24-105L. I agree. I owned the 24-105L for a time but sold it because I didn't think it was really a $1,200 lens. I got blasted in an online forum for stating that I thought my 28-105 was sharper than the 24-105L. Well, looks like some other people think so, too.
My 1D bag consists of only two lenses: the 28-105 Mark II and the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS USM. Given the 1D's crop of only 1.3, I'm all set to go from wide to super tele.
The 28-105 is a great lens for the price...and a great lens, period.
|
|
|
Aug 24, 2006
|
|
_vx_
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 21, 2006
Location: Norway
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 21, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Produces sharp images! Focusing is quick, quiet and precise. Reasonable price
|
|
Cons:
|
Not wide enough for a walking around lens on a 1.6 crop camera.
|
|
|
I've had this lens for quite some time now, and generally I'm really happy with it. It produces really sharp images and the auto-focus works like a dream. However, I'm often using this as a walking around lens, not carrying any other lenses with me, and for that purpose it's not really wide enough on my 350D (Digital Rebel XT). As long as you can live with that limitation (e.g. by always bringing a second lens) you will be really happy with this lens.
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2006
|
|
Lardog
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 16, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 30
|
|
Review Date: Aug 11, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $225.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
HSM, lightweight, decent IQ for the price.
|
|
Cons:
|
no hood included
|
|
This is a very decent little lens, especially for the price. It is a super upgrade over the kit lens for those looking for a little more reach from a walk around lens. The range works very well for me, however, I did run into limitations at the wide end during a recent trip to Yellowstone. Trying to shoot some of the pools and springs, 28mm on a crop camera just wasn't quite enough. An UW like the EF-S 10-22 or Sigma 10-20 would make a good companion to this lens.
The HSM is wonderful. Focus is fast and silent but it does miss on occasion. Once you get used to HSM, it's hard to use any lens that doesn't have it.
Image Quality is generally very good. Color and contrast are certainly not up to par with my 70-200 f/4L, but I didn't really expect it to be. Otherwise, pictures turn out reasonably sharp wide open and very sharp when stopped down to f/8 or above. Flare is also controlled pretty well, even when shooting directly into the sun. It should come with a hood though, as should all Canon lenses.
Some samples are below...
http://www.pbase.com/lardog/image/63508269/original
http://www.pbase.com/lardog/image/63560810/original
http://www.pbase.com/lardog/image/63612783
http://www.pbase.com/lardog/image/63697666
http://www.pbase.com/lardog/image/63563416/original
http://www.pbase.com/lardog/image/64928114/original
http://www.pbase.com/lardog/image/64928116/original
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2006
|
|
photoshutter
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 20, 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 39
|
|
Review Date: Jul 28, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great lens, fast USM ring, very sharp, easy to clean inside.
|
|
Cons:
|
zoom ring not too smoth.
|
|
|
Super lens, sharper than 50mm 1.8 and 24-105L
|
|
|
Jul 28, 2006
|
|
cooljordan
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 16, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 27, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $230.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
decent price, small and light weight, solid build, sharp, ubbar fast USM.
|
|
Cons:
|
lens creeps, extends in 2 parts when zooming (lots of dust probably gets in there)
|
|
|
This is an awesome lil lens. its the first one ive ever bought, so yah, im still kinda new to photograpghy. i really like this lens. theres not a lot i can say that hasnt already been said. good color, sharp, nice build, ect. one thing i wanna point out is that ive had this lens for about 2 months, and the lens is already starting to creep. BUMMER! in all fairness tho, i havnt taken incredably good care on it. all-in-all, its a great lens, and im still very happy that i bought it.
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2006
|
|
Ghost
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 22, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1817
|
|
Review Date: Jul 26, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Well built for the price, Ring-type USM = quiet and fast focus, Full-time manual focus, distance scale, good range, great pricing, good bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
a bit heavier than I am used to, no aspherical or LD glass, perfect if it is f2.8 constant.
|
|
|
I wasn't planning to buy this lens. However a used one came along my way. The price was very good and it was hardly ever used by the original owner.
Initially the 28mm short end seemed a bit too narrow for my liking. I've been using it for street photography and it proved to be a good match. The 105mm long end is excellent when i want to take portraits-style shots. Also it allows me to take pix of people from a distance where as my kit lens' 55mm wasn't long enough.
So far I am not missing the WA at all. But I haven't taken any landscape shots yet.
I like the build quality. Very nice for a consumer lens. The Ring USM is awesome! Very fast AF. Hasn't hunted even on low light situations. FTM is useful and so is the distance scale. I can easily resell this for the same price I bought if not more. LOL!
|
|
|
Jul 26, 2006
|
|
abqnmusa
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: May 11, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1962
|
|
Review Date: Jul 6, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Using 28-105 F3.5-4.5 with a Canon EOS 5D. The lens is light weight, handles quickly, zoom ring easy to operate, takes sharp images with good color and contrast. I sold my Canon EF 24-70 F2.8L heavy brick lens and bought this. The 24-70 was too heavy for hiking, slow handling due to weight, and just not pleasant to use for long periods of time. I have no regrets as the 28-105 is perfect for hiking, and handles so much quicker.
|
|
Cons:
|
The hood is extra cost. You have to stop it down a bit more that L lens to get the same sharp images.
|
|
|
This is a very good consumer film lens that also works very well on the Canon EOS 5D.
|
|
|
Jul 6, 2006
|
|
coolest
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 27, 2003
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Jun 24, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $215.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good price, light weight, reasonably well built, reasonably fast (good apature size) for its price, good focusing speed, full time manual focus etc
|
|
Cons:
|
Lens hood not included (need to spend extra $$)
|
|
|
I have been using this lens for more than 2 years now, this was my most used lens (even though I have 2 other L lens) because of the handy zoom range
Really good price, only a little more than its little brother (28-105 F4-5.6), but with full-time manual focus, see-through focusing distance meter, inner focusing system (the front won't rotate while focusing, good for filters) etc etc.
However, when using the focusing points on the edge of the frame, the focusing speed greatly reduced, and sometimes have difficulty focusing in low lights too, even with the help of SpeedLite's focusing assistance Lamp.
Sadly I'm saying good bye to this lens, as the long-desired upgrade lens (24-105 F4 L IS USM) has arrived.
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2006
|
|
Strid3r
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 18, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1329
|
|
Review Date: Jun 15, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Size, weight, bang for the buck
|
|
Cons:
|
Not as sharp as more expensive lenses
|
|
|
I was debating between this lens and the Canon 24-135 mostly because it has IS. I decided to go with the 28-105 in the end because it fit my budget better and I didn't really need the IS. Of course it didn't hurt that there are very few negative reviews on the lens. It is much better than I ever expected and is color, contrast, and sharpness are as advertised, great, but not the best. I got it as a walk around lens it serves its purpose well. I didn't want a real wide lens for walking around and that seems to be one of the major knocks on it. I would recommend this for anyone who wants a great walk around lens and would strongly suggest for them go to a camera store and evaluate this lens side by side with the 24-135 IS and see which is best. I found the optics and build quality to be identical, but in the end it was the smaller size that made up my mind.
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2006
|
|
RikWriter
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 22, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2424
|
|
Review Date: Jun 14, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Light and handy, inexpensive, useful focal length, sharp enough with good contrast.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not as sharp as an L, not as wide at the wide end as I'd like with a 1.6X crop.
|
|
|
I bought this lens as an all-around walkaround for my 10D after I replaced my Digital Rebel with it. It's a very nice lens for the money, and produced many nice images for me. Not quite as sharp as I would prefer, nor as wide at the wide end as I would have liked with a crop camera, but a very handy, useful lens nonetheless.
My wife still uses it on her film SLR.
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2006
|
|
rickcanon
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 18, 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 18, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast, Quick, Quiet
|
|
Cons:
|
none so far (little bit soft at the wide end)
|
|
|
Sold my kit lens and bought this lens instead of the standard 350D kit lens, it is a perfect walkaround lets that's let's you zoom a little more than the standard lens.
Pictures are overall very good, sometimes a little soft. It is compact, fast and a good value for the price paid.
I can recommend this lens if you want a little more zoom and somewhat better quality than the starter kit lens.
|
|
|
May 18, 2006
|
|
doogs38
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 11, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 11, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Size, Solid build, Focus - very quick (ring USM) and quiet, Reasonably sharp, Front element doesn't rotate, Lens hood, Metal base, Nice focal range
|
|
Cons:
|
Susceptible to flare (lens hood is a must), Gets soft wide open, Not sure that it is really 105mm at the long end
|
|
|
After using the 18-55 kit lens for a few months I decided to upgrade to the 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 after reading the positive reports here at FM. Note: there is another version that is slower and without the metal base - stay away from it, its junk.
I wasn't expecting this lens to turn out uber sharp photographs like my Sigma 100-300 EX DG HSM, however, for the price it produces excellent results. There is nothing for me to complain about except the hood is a must - glare can be an issue. The hood reverses on its mount and hugs the lens which makes it easy to pack. I use this lens at my daughters equestrian and little athletics events and it is an excellent focal length for leaving on the camera and just 'carting around'.
|
|
|
May 11, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
122
|
297639
|
Sep 26, 2012
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
89% of reviewers
|
$216.72
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.31
|
9.02
|
8.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
