EGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 37 Posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 5365 times:
Could anybody quickly tell me anything about this lens, whether it is any good or not? I'd expect it to be not so good as its relatively cheap with a poor aperture but i'd just like to hear anyway before I buy something more expensive .
LGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5324 times:
Few points, firstly I agree with Royal, avoid these hyperzoom's. Secondly email@example.com, thirdly, always try and buy the manufacturers lenses i/e canon lenses or if you have to sigma nothing else.
Also, I know you dont have an unlimited budget cos I dont either :s but try to spend a good amount on your lenses, I have skimped in the past on my smaller lens. Last week got a replacemtn and now I know why there was a price difference between the two!
So gof ro Canon branded lenses and try to spend as much as you can allow otherwise youll be unhappy and will upgrade soon anyway threfore loosing the benefit of buying a 'cheap' lens
EGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 37 Reply 4, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 5260 times:
Well, it was just on the off chance, I knew it wouldn't be great but I just wondered what sort of problems the lens had. At the moment I'm planning to order a new 28-90mm and a new 75-300mm Canon lenses. By the way the reason why i'm enquiring about lenses is because i've gone to the dark side (well I was already there but i'm well and truly there now ) and bought a DSLR (ok its just a Canon D30 but they are still great!).
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5176 times:
I used to have a Sigma 28-300mm Hyperzoom. Actually, I still do, but it has languished in my closet for the past two years. Poor light performance, poor sharpness, and bad vignetting. Biggest waste of money I ever spent on camera equipment. I'd hold my nose and keep my distance if I were you.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 660 posts, RR: 17 Reply 8, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5166 times:
Just because its got "Canon" written on it does not mean its a good lens - they've produced some real crap at the lower end of the range, and the 28-90 is a case in point. This is a "kit lens" ie. intended to be given away with a camera body, and hence built to a minimum spec. Soft and poor build quality as well as being slow.
This is one of those lenses you'll want to replace from the moment you get it. I'd suggest either waiting until you can afford it and get the much better Canon 24-85. Alternatively, let your legs be the zoom and get the Canon 50mm 1.8 - which must be the quality bargain in the Canon line up.
If your concern is the wideangle side of things, look at the Tokina 19-35mm which is inviting comparisons with Canon "L" superwides.
LGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 5150 times:
I know not all Canon lenses are great. Believe me, I had the 35-80 I got a while back as part of a 'kit' what a load of tosh! Worst lens ever!
The 50mm 1.8 is a quality bargain thats for sure! The 24-85 I was looking at but with the situation I am in with uni approaching blah blah blah I opted for a used 28-105mm. I am very pleased with it for the money and much better than my old kit lens. I know its not the best but does the job.
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 20 Reply 10, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5139 times:
Same with all brands of course.
Just stay away from the cheapest offerings in any brand, take at least one class up.
Though there are exceptions. The Nikon 28-80 AF-D was a very nice lens for the money. Of course not as good by far as the 28-105 but at a quarter the price that's not something to expect.
At least it was possible to get decent results from it until I got spoiled with a Tokina 28-70 f/2.6-2.8 ATX-Pro (after which it turned out to pale in comparison even faster than I'd expected).
EGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 37 Reply 11, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 5129 times:
Colin - So I should stay away from the 28-90mm then? The reason why I wanted to buy one was obviously with the crop factor of the D30 I need something wide, with 50mm not being wide enough anyway its just not enough. I don't know whether I can afford the 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 USM II or the 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 USM.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 660 posts, RR: 17 Reply 12, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 5125 times:
The 28-90 is particularly poor at 28mm. I wouldn't touch it. I think the best value/quality compromise in this area at the moment are the Tokina 19-35 - available for about £170 or the Tamron 19-35mm at around £180, including lens hood.
At this price, you will have some distortion, and some softness wide open, but within acceptable limits - going as wide as 19mm is a real benefit on "cropped" DSLRs - after all 28mm is pretty close to a standard lens field of view (44mm) on the D30.
If at a later stage you feel the need to fill the 35-70 gap, you have a number of lenses in the 28-70mm range to choose from, or save some money and buy the 50mm 1.8 and take a few extra steps (that's what I did).
Alternatively, get a used fixed focal length as an interim measure - a quick check on Jessops shows a surfiet of Canon 28mm f2.8 lenses - should be available at a keen price.