User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  6
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Older EF lens

  1. #1
    Ausphotography irregular Mark L's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Nov 2010
    Location
    magical Mudgee
    Posts
    18,827
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Older EF lens

    Used to use a EOS 5. It stuffed up a few years back. A combination of digital cameras invading the market place and "life" getting in the way meant leaving photography alone for a while.
    Well "life" doesn't work without photography, and today my 60D arrived. and I'll be using the older EF lens that I possess. They are:-

    EF 28-105 f/4-5.6 USM, and
    EF 90-300 f/4.5-5.6.


    Does anyone have an opinion on these? Has the world of EF moved on, making them redundant?
    Cheers.

  2. #2
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    16,815
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MARK L View Post
    ..
    .EF 28-105 f/4-5.6 USM, and
    EF 90-300 f/4.5-5.6.

    Does anyone have an opinion on these? Has the world of EF moved on, making them redundant?
    Cheers.
    No opinion of note, but if they bend the light well, well, why not?
    Am.
    CC, Image editing OK.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    27 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    650
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In a word, yes.

    I haven't come across the 90-300 but a friend of mine had a copy of the 28-105 which he tried to use on a 40D after a break from photography... he eventually bought a 17-85 (which itself is a pretty modest performer) and couldn't believe how much better it was.

    Having spent the money on a 60D, I think you owe it to yourself to at least try / borrow a mid-range lens such as the 15-85 (not 17-85), so that you can make your own mind up.

    Aside from quality, I also think you'll find the 28-105 to be too long at the wide end (28mm x 1.6 crop = 45mm) to use as a walk-around lens...
    Richard
    Canon 5D4 | 11-24 f/4 L | 24-105 f/4 L| 100-400 L II | 85 f/1.2 L | 100 f/2.8 L macro | MP-E 65 f/2.8 macro | 1.4x | 580EX2 | MT-24 Twin Lite | Manfrotto | Photoshop CS5


  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    none of those 2 lenses are even considered to be competent performers in this current generation of digital photography, and their flaws will be even more pronounced on a full frame camera.

    the Canon 18-55 IS kit lens performs a lot better overall than the 28-105 IMO.

  5. #5
    can't remember Tannin's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Apr 2007
    Location
    Ballarat
    Posts
    2,895
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Mark, you will still be a mile better off than you ever were back in the days of film, and a light year better off that you were with no camera at all! So to begin with, you will find everything is roses. Then you will start to notice that your wide end is not very wide at all, and that will frustrate you. Your glass won't be as good as current glass, but still plenty good enough for the time being (we - all of us - get ridiculously fussy about equipment sometimes) and you can consider adding to it when the time comes. There is no rush. Tricky's advice is excellent, as we have come to expect from him
    Tony

    People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.

  6. #6
    Ausphotography irregular
    Threadstarter
    Mark L's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Nov 2010
    Location
    magical Mudgee
    Posts
    18,827
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thank you so far.
    I don't like using zoom lens at the extremes, so other lens will be needed down the track.
    JM. when I can afford a ff camera, I reckon I can afford better glass. 60D stretched the budget I've started saving already(again)

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    19 Aug 2010
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    628
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The older low end EF zooms are pretty slow to focus, the IQ is not so great. I think most people using them back in the day would probably be printing up to 8x10 which is probably fine, but when you view 18mp at 100% on your computer all these things show up.
    It depends what you want, but it is not worth spending alot of money on a nice body and not having a nice lens also.
    1DIII, 5DII, 15mm fish, 24mm ts-e, 35L,135L,200L,400L,mpe-65mm
    Film: eos 300, pentax 6x7

  8. #8
    Member dannat's Avatar
    Join Date
    29 Nov 2010
    Location
    WOODEND
    Posts
    85
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i have 2 ef LENSES -the quality of there pics is quite good -the focus finding is prob the biggest issue cf. with todays usm lens - sometimes they can hunt around a little, takes a couple of secs - cf fractions of a sec to the newer lens. mine are both metal mounts & feel well made - much better than the 18-55
    i would use them & see how they go
    anothe rplus is cos they made for film - the edges are usually pretty good - & can be used on ff
    Last edited by dannat; 12-07-2011 at 11:10am.
    Oly e500 zd14-54 zd70-300
    35-70/4 70-210/4 (leftover from old camera )

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •