> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 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. ...
Hi Sudeep, Please note that I own the 22-55, and I have even seen one in person. I do not have any examples of photos on the web taken with the EF 22-55 to answer questions like yours, because I had not written a review of this lens :-) The EF 22-55mm is a wide-normal zoom lens. Although it was first released together with the APS EOS-IX body, it can also be used as a general purpose lens for 35mm EOS bodies. The lens offers a wide-angle to normal field-of-view in a remarkably lightweight yet sturdy package. The lens mount is plastic, just like kit zoom lenses such as the EF 35-70 III, the 28-80 V, and the 28-90. The lens motor focuses quickly and silently, due to the use a micro-USM motor, but helical rotatory extension is used, so the front element will rotate during focussing, but only extends during zooming. Optically, the lens can produce sharp pictures, but care must be taken to avoid flare. As it has a wide angle of view at the 22mm end, any flash shots must be taken with care to diffuse or bounce the flash to avoid dark corners. When used without flash, the lens offers similar optical performance to the kit zoom lenses. There is surprisingly little vignetting or light falloff, and contrast appears adequate for snapshots. I have not tried using this lens for high-magnification enlargements. The lenses to compare against are the EF 20-35mm, which is in a higher price bracket together with the third party wide angle zooms (Tamron, Tokina, Sigma, Vivitar, etc), and single focal length lenses. At an even higher tier are the L zooms EF 16-35L, 17-35L, and 20-35L. If you have been satisfied with an EF 28-80 f/3.5-5.6, or if your budget only extends to an 22-55, you cannot go wrong, since there is little competition at that price point. You will not find anything wider, faster, lighter, or more compatible or convenient. If you need/want higher optical quality, you can always pay more (e.g. Zeiss, Voigtlander, etc). Cheers Julian Loke * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
