Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 14, 2004, 1:05 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

It all depends on the review site, if you look here the Tokina's make it to third place, right behind the two Canon L lenses (24-70 and 28-70). The Tamron is further down the list. Who to believe?

http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html

The main disadvantage I found with the 28-135 (I own it) is that it has lens creep. I had it repaired once, but it came back after a few months of use. It is actually quite annoying. But it does take very good pictures and the IS can be helpful.

Agreed with NHL, the F2.8 is really nice. It is also really nice to have a constant aperture across the whole zoom range.

Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2004, 5:57 AM   #12
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

barthold wrote:
Quote:
It all depends on the review site, if you look here the Tokina's make it to third place, right behind the two Canon L lenses (24-70 and 28-70). The Tamron is further down the list. Who to believe?

http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html
Are you sure? Based on that same URL, the Tamron is 3rd... The two Tokina's are further down the list. They are also both larger (and much heavier) than the Tamron!
http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#Zstf

I also agree with the 28-135 IS zoom creep (both up and down) under its own weight. The f/3.5-5.6 makes it a pain to use in studio, but the most serious issue with this lens is its focusing distance changes a lot when one recomposes with the zoom... For what it costs, it's a reasonable purchase though: a wide zoom range and image stabilization to boot for the IS freak in all of us :?
NHL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2004, 4:49 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
Are you sure? Based on that same URL, the Tamron is 3rd... The two Tokina's are further down the list. They are also both larger (and much heavier) than the Tamron!
http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#Zstf
Yes, I'm sure. Click on the link, go to Canon EOS, Sort by Performance and Standard Zooms. The 24-70L is at the top and gets a score of 4.32, the 28-70 a score of 4.29, the Tokina AF 28-70 f2.8 ATX a 4.01, the Tamron 28-75 F2.8 Di SPXR a 3.49 and the Canon 28-135 a 2.78.

Quote:
I also agree with the 28-135 IS zoom creep (both up and down) under its own weight. The f/3.5-5.6 makes it a pain to use in studio, but the most serious issue with this lens is its focusing distance changes a lot when one recomposes with the zoom... For what it costs, it's a reasonable purchase though: a wide zoom range and image stabilization to boot for the IS freak in all of us :?
Right. I just upgraded to the 24-70L and convinced myself to give up the IS :-) It definitely does not creep at all. I'm not sure about the focusing distance changing when zooming.

Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2004, 11:09 PM   #14
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

barthold wrote:
Quote:
Yes, I'm sure. Click on the link, go to Canon EOS, Sort by Performance and Standard Zooms. The 24-70L is at the top and gets a score of 4.32, the 28-70 a score of 4.29, the Tokina AF 28-70 f2.8 ATX a 4.01, the Tamron 28-75 F2.8 Di SPXR a 3.49 and the Canon 28-135 a 2.78
Right which set of numbers should we trust (from the same site)?
Canon EF 2.8 24-70mm USM L 4.16
Canon EF 2.8 28-70mm USM L 4.15
Tamron AF 2.8 28-75mm LD XR 4.14
Tokina AF 2.8 28-80mm AT-X Pro 3.66
Canon EF 3.5-5.6 28-135mm IS 3.25
:-):-):-):-):-):-)



Quote:
I just upgraded to the 24-70L and convinced myself to give up the IS It definitely does not creep at all. I'm not sure about the focusing distance changing when zooming.
Good choice! It seems like the 24-70 and another 12-24 are the way to go... My 28-135 is not wide enough and if I need the long I rather use my 70-200 f/2.8, no wonder it always get left behind. :evil:
NHL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2004, 3:31 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
Good choice! It seems like the 24-70 and another 12-24 are the way to go... My 28-135 is not wide enough and if I need the long I rather use my 70-200 f/2.8, no wonder it always get left behind. :evil:
I now have the 17-40L, 24-70L and 70-200 IS F2.8L. I love these three lenses! The 17-40 is just great, and so is the 24-70 from the little I've seen. I definitely can see the contrast and color difference compared to the 28-135. Out of the three the 70-200 is actually the least sharp. I do need to get it fixed I think It sucks since it is the most expensive one too.

Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2004, 3:40 PM   #16
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

Does the front elements of the 24-70L rotate when you focus?
NHL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2004, 10:24 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
Does the front elements of the 24-70L rotate when you focus?
Nope, I cannot see anything move inside the lens either with AF or MF. Obviously the barrel itself doesn't rotate (not when zooming either). Why?

Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 6:18 AM   #18
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

That's good, I just want to double check before getting one... The 24-70 is a front focus, whereas most other designs have it internally. I always use a polarizer for my seascape shot and had bad experience with rotating front element!

BTW regarding your 70-200 have you try to shoot a brick wall at an angle? The steeper the better... I've found this test to be very useful at varying apertures. It also pin-point any focusing problem or problematic lens much better than any technical chart.
It also let me gauge the effect of the 1.4x or 2x TC and at what aperture they'll perform at their best.
NHL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 11:33 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
That's good, I just want to double check before getting one... The 24-70 is a front focus, whereas most other designs have it internally. I always use a polarizer for my seascape shot and had bad experience with rotating front element!
The front-element does move back and forth, just like the 28-135, when zooming. It comes out at the wide angle (24mm) and is all the way in at the long end. The difference is that the hood is not attached to the front-element, but to the part of the casing that doesn't move. The hood is deep enough to always cover the front-element when zooming. Thus the front-element moves back and forth inside the hood. Pretty nifty really.

Quote:
BTW regarding your 70-200 have you try to shoot a brick wall at an angle? The steeper the better... I've found this test to be very useful at varying apertures. It also pin-point any focusing problem or problematic lens much better than any technical chart.
It also let me gauge the effect of the 1.4x or 2x TC and at what aperture they'll perform at their best.
I don't have a brick wall handy to test this on. I've been using the box my 24-70 lens came in. Its white with black text (and the red "L") at different sizes. I shot it straight on and at 45 degree angle with all my lenses (on a tripod of course). The 70-200 is the worst one from the lot. I'll redo the test one more time and can post some pictures to get your opinion.

Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:21 PM.