Jim Davis wrote: > > Judging by what they go for in Japan at auction, I'd say that lens is > a low quality consumer lens. They go pretty cheap and lots of used > ones means people try them and dump them. > > Wouldn't it be nice if Photodo updated to include all Canon lenses > available? > > Course, it would be nice to have a lens like that for vacations and > stuff, but only if you don't care about quality. I'm sure it would > make lovely 4 by 6 snaps. > > Although I used to be happy with consumer zooms, once you've got some > nice lenses, it seems silly to use anything less. > > Price is a very good indicator of the quality of lenses I've found.
This lens is rated on Photodo, and IMO is much more a carry-around lens than say the over-twice-as-heavy 28-70. Like Canon's other better consumer lenses, is is a ring-type USM with FTM. It's also wider and a third lighter than the 28-135. Personally, I would choose the 28-135 because of IS and the greater zoom range, but the 24-85 is no slacker, and I can that say from owning and using both lenses. If price is the determining factor, then the 24-85 is about the same as the 50 1.4. Phil Greenspun has some comments on the 24-85 here: http://www.photo.net/canon/24-85 I agree that it is better than the 28-105, somewhat less than the 28-135. Tom P. * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
