Thoughts and Options between Canon Lens

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by johata3, Nov 18, 2009.

  1. johata3 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    #1
    I apologize if this topic has been discussed. Search option has given me too many results.

    I am a beginner in photography. I began shooting when I first purchased my Canon Kiss X2 (450D/XSi). I currently own a 50mm f/1.8 II and 75-300mm lens as a starter.

    I wanted to expand my shooting so I was wondering if it is better to get the Canon EF 28-105mm or Canon EF 28-135mm? I am working my way up to purchase a lens but I am not sure which one to get.

    I was wondering everyone's reviews and thoughts between these two lens.
     
  2. Edge100 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 14, 2002
    Location:
    Where am I???
    #2
    EF 28-105 review

    EF 28-135 review

    Note that the 28-105 is faster (f/4.5) at its long end than the 28-135 is at its long end (f/5.6).

    Either of these lenses are a step up from the 75-300.
     
  3. toxic macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    #3
    both are decent and both are hardly wide. consider a Canon 24-85 f/3.5-4.5, 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, or Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 instead.
     
  4. Designer Dale macrumors 68040

    Designer Dale

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Location:
    Folding space
  5. AlaskaMoose macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2008
    Location:
    Alaska
    #5
    Through the years I have learned that one can save some cash by taking one's time and then buying a better quality lens, hopefully the best one can afford. I have a few lenses that I have purchased because I rushed into it. I could have saved that cash and purchased one or two L lenses, or at least two or three real nice non-L lenses.

    The "best bang for the buck" in relation to zoom lenses is the Canon EF 70-200 f/4L USM. It doesn't have IS, but costs around $500.00 and produces incredibly nice images.

    What I would do is to buy a lens such as the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, or any zoom lens similar to this one (Sigma or Canon). That would cover the bases from 17-50mm or so. Then the 70-200 will take care of the rest.

    Another outstanding L lens is the EF 200mm f/2.8L USM. When I bought mine years ago I paid around $700.00. It should cost around $600.00 these days. This lens is incredibly fast-focusing and sharp. Before I had a Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro lens, I used the 200 with a Kenko tube for close-up photography of flowers and insects.

    This link shows the EF 70-200mm at B&H, but I believe that it does not cost as much at Amazon:
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/183198-USA/Canon_2578A002_70_200mm_f_4_0L_USM_Autofocus.html

    The 200mm prime:
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/129190-USA/Canon_2529A004_Telephoto_EF_200mm_f_2_8L.html
     

Share This Page