Canon Canon EF 28-105 F/3.5-4.5 II USM vs Canon EF 24-85mm

If you're a user of a Canon DSLR, then welcome. This is your home.

Moderators: gstark, Moderators

Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is. Please also check the portal page for more information on this.

Canon Canon EF 28-105 F/3.5-4.5 II USM vs Canon EF 24-85mm

Postby michael_antoi on Mon May 15, 2006 10:48 pm

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?
michael_antoi
Newbie
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 6:57 pm
Location: Sydney West

Postby Marty on Mon May 15, 2006 10:58 pm

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.
What does that button do....??
User avatar
Marty
Member
 
Posts: 436
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 7:54 pm
Location: Queenscliff, Nth Beaches, Sydney

Postby ozonejunkie on Mon May 15, 2006 11:01 pm

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 :oops:

If you want to see 100% crops of these images, please PM me.

Tristan
User avatar
ozonejunkie
Member
 
Posts: 353
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 4:52 pm
Location: ANU, Canberra - EOS 30D

Postby DionM on Thu Jun 15, 2006 6:42 pm

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.

Canon 20D and a bunch of lovely L glass and a 580EX. Benro tripod. Manfrotto monopod. Lowepro and Crumpler bags. And a pair of Sigma teleconverters, and some Kenko tubes.
http://www.dionm.net/
DionM
Senior Member
 
Posts: 898
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 10:11 pm
Location: Holland Park, Brisbane


Return to Canon Corral