Sudeep Mukherjee wrote: > Dear list members > I have been a member of the mailing list for almost a > year but have never particpated out of sheer fear. You > guys posses L series lenses and EOS 3, 1, etc. which > leave alone possessing I have not seen in my city, > Calcutta, India. Calcutta, for that matter, India is > more of a Nikon fan. I have a EOS 500N (Rebel G) with > a 28-80 zoom. Camera equipment is very expensive in > India and on my slalary I can not even dream about L > series lenses. I want to buy the EF 22-55 which is > amazingly cheap. I only take pictures when I am > travelling and will never publish. > > Is this lens as good (or bad) as the 28-80? If it is > of the same quality then I do not mind buying the > 22-55. Then 28-80 is really bad but if used within its > limitation is not bad for me at the present. If rarely > use it wider than f/8. I hane seen photographs taken > by Ken Durling with an EF 75-300mm and I am impressed. > This is the only telephoto zoom readily available here > in India. The latest Tamron 70-300 macro is also > available. I am now torn between the EF 75-300 and the > Tamron 70-300. Buying the Tamron will give me basic > macro abilities. I think attaching a close up > attachment to the EF 75-300 will also give good > results. > > Anyways, could you guys help me decide: > > 1. EF 22-55 > 2. EF 75-300 or the Tamron 70-300 macro (the latest > one is available in India) ... > Sudeep Mukherjee > Calcutta, India
Sudeep, Please note that I do not own the 22-55, nor have I ever seen one in person. I collected the following old examples of photos on the web taken with the EF 22-55 to answer questions like yours, because I never saw a review of this lens. Pasted answer from someone's earlier question about this lens: Marc Erik Herant wrote: > > Any opinions, bad or good, on the above lens? A couple of photos with this lens at Allan Engelhardt's site: http://cybaea.com/photo/lens-quality.html If I remember correctly, photodo.com gave it a 2.8 rating (not great), though I've liked the very few photos I've seen taken with it. It's one of the few Canon EF lenses I don't recall ever seeing a review of. I haven't used it (I've got the EF 24-85). [and later] Ran into this site yesterday. Bunches of not very good photos with the 22-55, but if you check the other lens reviews, the photographer seems incapable of taking many good photos with any lens: http://www.camera.canon.com.my/photography/nut/99issue/11topic/index.htm Please note that I do not own the 22-55, nor have I ever seen one in person. Subject: Re: Canon EF 22-55mm f/4,0-5,6 USM Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 11:03:49 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Godfrey DiGiorgi) Organization: Col. Kendrick's Home For Retired Starship Troopers Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm > Can anyone offer an opinion on the image quality achieved by > the EF 22-55mm f/4.0-5.6 USM? I've recently acquired a Canon EOS IX body and this was the first lens I bought, very inexpensively ($40 used). I shot two rolls of film with it, one B&W and one color, and examined the negatives afterwards. With APS format, it produces a satisfactory snapshot quality photo, perhaps a little better than that, suitable for enlargement in the 8x range at most (about a 6x10" print, full frame) and has a handy zoom range (equivalent to 28-70mm in 35mm format). I noted significant flare and degraded off-axis definition/contrast. Pincushion and barrel distortion varies by focal length and grows more acute at the zoom limits. It's slow speed makes for a light and compact lens, but compromises available light shooting, makes for a lower quality print as you must shoot with faster films. Stopping it down does improve resolution in the corners. The rotating front element would make working with a polarizing filter a headache. I added the lens hood (at $20+ dollars!) which helped reduce flare to a small extent. It's unfortunate that it was an APS kit lens, as it is not as sharp as many other 35mm Canon lenses and sub-35mm formats need *better* lenses than 35mm to achieve satisfactory. A friend of mine uses one with his Canon EOS Rebel and gets good results with it, he can make 8x12" prints that are very nice and his snapshot-size prints look great. If your needs are in line with the capabilities of this lens, it is a good buy at the price, the size and weight are very appealing for travel. Just be aware of its deficiencies and limitations. Godfrey 22-55 shot compared to a 100mm macro shot of same subject: http://www.bayarea.net/~ramarren/photostuff/lenscomparo/comparo.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Jameson * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
