Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,568   Posts: 1,621,838   Online: 803
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1
    ath
    ath is offline
    ath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    889

    recommend a standard zoom for Canon EOS

    Hi,

    I had the Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR DI zoom for my Canons and was very satisfied with the results. Unfortunately is was stolen.
    Now I'm in the market for a new standard zoom for traveling.

    My requirements are:
    - small
    - lightweight
    - good optical quality, should give sharp slides at least down to f/4
    - not too expensive (below 400€)

    f/2.8 is not a requirement, but i found it to be quite convenient in case one needs it.
    When I bought the last one 3 years ago I had a look in the Sigma 28-70 as well, but found it to be horribly noisy.
    Zoom range: lower end 28mm is sufficient, upper range: well, as big as possible.

    The lens is intended as a complement to a Canon 70-200/4L.

    Any recommendations, except the obvious, buy a new Tamron?
    Regards,
    Andreas

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,183
    Images
    107
    Before I opened this I was going to suggest the tamron. Why are you against buying it again? Just looking for an opportunity to "upgrade?"

    Your other option is probably the 24-70 f/2.8L which as you know isn't cheap. Or the 24-105 f/4L IS which again, isn't cheap. The 28-105 USM II is a great lens but of course it's variable aperture f/3.5-4.5 which might be mildy annoying under a few circumstances. I like mine though - sharp, small, fast AF, decent construction. Otherwise I don't know what your options are beyond those horrid 28-300 megazoom lenses.
    The universe is a haunted house. -Coil
    .

  3. #3
    ath
    ath is offline
    ath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    889
    Thanks for the response, Walter.
    I have nothing against the Tamron, I liked it. Just want to check, if there is another option I have overlooked that might suit my purposes better.
    Regards,
    Andreas

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,787
    Images
    2
    My ex took many wonderful pictures with the... 28-135 IS? About $300-400 if I remember correctly.

    Though since you already have a 70-200, I'd be tempted by the 24-105. Actually, I wouldn't be tempted since I shoot with just a 28 and a 50

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    22
    I've got a 28-105 f3.5-4.5 USM II. Light, reasonably compact, cheap, pretty sharp. It's not an L lens, but it's also not as heavy as an L lens. I've not tried the 28-135, but I've gotten the impression that it's not quite as sharp. The 28-105 IS fairly sharp (it doesn't blow me away in comparison to my 50/1.8 and 70-200 f4, but I don't cringe when I use it, either).

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    N. Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    361
    Sigma just came out with a 24-70/2.8 in the same price range as the Tamron, I think.

  7. #7
    GeoffHill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Newcastle, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    298
    Images
    8
    I've found that recently, the 17-40 f4 Cannon has become my standard lens.

    There cant be that many subjects that you can't either get a little closer to and use the 40, or move a little further away from and use the 70

  8. #8
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,683
    Images
    148
    When my Canon lens ceased functioning a week outside warranty I bought the Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR DI zoom it really is a superb lens. That extra stop compared to an f4 lens makes a huge difference. If I was in your shoes I'd buy another.

    Ian

  9. #9
    kevin_c's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Dorset, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    32
    Another vote for the Canon 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 USM II - As stated, not 'L' build quality, but a cracking lens none the less.
    I 'upgraded' from this to the 24-105L and in all honesty didn't detect much of a difference, with the 'L' only just excelling in contrast and sharpness, but not by much.

    Can't comment on the Tamron 28-75, but if you were happy with it before you might want to stick with it - It's about a stop faster, constant aperture and get pretty good reviews, although I've heard it can be a bit soft wide open.
    --Kevin--

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,325
    "Another vote for the Canon 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 USM II."

    And yet another.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin