On 4/10/2012 5:51 PM, Joel Wilcox wrote:
> ... By now it will be clear that I am looking for an AF 28-105 just so the 5D
> doesn't forget how to do AF.
That is quite a different lens from the 35-105/2.8.
> My local camera store has a couple Tammy 28-75/2.8, which would be OK, but
> those are selling for about $350 and the
> 28-105 for EOS usually goes for about the same. The disadvantage is that the
> 28-105 is a much heavier lens, huge front
> element.
Yup, much bigger and heavier than the 35-105. I believe Walt had a fair bit to
say about his, should you care to dip
into the archives. Too big and heavy for what it does for my taste. In MF days,
I went to slower for longer zoom range,
Tokina AT-X 35-200/3.5-4.5 and Kiron 28-210/4-5.6, 1:4, among some others that
didn't work as well as those for me.
> The other disadvantage is that it probably need an AF 80-200 to go with it.
The Tammy 28-300/3.5-6.3 takes care of the whole range. Sounds a bit slow at
the long end, but I've taken hundreds,
likely thousands, of at least technically successful shots at 300 mm, and it's
as fast or faster at 200 than the 28-200.
Exceptional C-U performance at the long end. The ordinary version is amazingly
small and light. My copy of the VC
version is slightly sharper at the long end, but the AF may be slightly less
reliable at the long end than my non-VC one.
Focus speed/noise has been fine with me for well over 10,000 shots, but not a
patch on Canon's own Ultrasonic focus
lenses, most of which have full time MF availability without switching. If the
Canon 28-300L didn't cost the Earth and
weigh about as much, I'd probably have it. I might even go for the $ price, but
not the size/weight.
Zoom Zoom Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|