> > Hi guys, > One question on , > 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM > 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM > 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM > Whish takes better quality photos? > Which lens should I buy? > Sorry for bothering with (probably) already discussed topic, but > (unfortunately) I'm not so rich to waste my money on something that isn't > good. :) > Thanks, > David
Hi David, Assuming equally good technique and C-41 processing good enough to revel the differences on prints OR if shooting chromes I'd rank them in this order: #1 EF 28-105 3.5-4.5USM II, IMO the clear winner #2 EF 24-85 3/5-4.5USM, second but not far back #3 EF 28-200 3.5-5.6USM, not work considering given the other lenses listed Personally I'd buy one of the first two lens that better suits your shooting interests best. The 24-85 can sometimes be more useful for scenic shots and still has enough reach to get nice looser portraits. The 28-105 can't get quite as wide and you will find yourself backing up to get it all in sometimes BUT that 20mm on the long end allows you to capture much tighter head shots and offers more versatility. While the 28-200 is attractive in terms of focal length covered it's a distant third place in all performance respects when compared to Canon's 24-85USM and 28-105USM zoom lenses. Hope this helps you some! Regards, Chip Louie * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
