Canon Canon EF 28-105 F/3.5-4.5 II USM vs Canon EF 24-85mm
Posted:
Mon May 15, 2006 10:48 pmby michael_antoi
How do these compare with each other?
They are a very similar price and fred miranda rates the 105 higher than the 85mm
Does anyone have experience with both of these lens?
I would obviously want to go for the 105 for the extra zoom
Opinions?
Posted:
Mon May 15, 2006 10:58 pmby Marty
Hey Michael,
FM is generally the best forum to look at when comparing lenses.
Another Canon site also has a lens section which may help you.....
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/index.php?
or
DPReview has a lens section.
http://www.dpreview.com
Sorry but I dont personally have any experience of those two lenses.
Posted:
Mon May 15, 2006 11:01 pmby ozonejunkie
G'day Michael,
I use the older metal mount version of the 28-105 as my main lens. I reckon it is great.
It absouloutely sings at f7.1-f8.0. I have not dealt with the other lens, but I do love the 28-105. Even at 100mm it is normally very sharp.
A couple of pics that I have taken with it include:
http://photos.ozonejunkie.com/v/night/p ... p.jpg.html
and:
http://photos.ozonejunkie.com/v/water/f ... p.JPG.html
Apologies for the poor quality JPEG's
If you want to see 100% crops of these images, please PM me.
Tristan
Posted:
Thu Jun 15, 2006 6:42 pmby DionM
Sorry for the late reply.
I used to have the 28-105 and it was great. I looked at the 24-85 before buying and as far as I could remember they were pretty much equals in quality. I think the 28-105 is better at the long end, but the 24-85 was better at the wide end. Not much difference however.
I also felt I would get more out of the extra 20mm reach than 4mm wide. I only sold it recently (to Ozonejunkie actually!) and kinda regretted it as it was a good general purpose range. I actually purchased the 24-105 L IS just recently to 'replace' it, as Canon no longer sell the 'good' 28-105 with USM.
