Lenses: Canon 18-55mm kit vs 28-105 3.5-4.5 USM II

CameronCameron Registered Users Posts: 745 Major grins
edited February 25, 2006 in Cameras
I'm likely going to buy the 30D when it is available. I plan to save for some nicer glass, but in the meantime would I be better served by the kit lens or the EF 28-105 F/3.5-4.5? I already own the latter which I used with my old EOS 10s. Granted, the kit lens is only $100 when purchased with the camera, but I could put that $100 towards something nicer down the road if the 28-105 would serve me well in the meantime.
My suspicion is that the 28-105 is of better quality, albeit lacking the wide-angle of the kit lens. Thoughts?

Comments

  • JacksmynameJacksmyname Registered Users Posts: 37 Big grins
    edited February 25, 2006
    I got the 18-55 with my 20D; not bad for what it is considering the price.
    The EF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 II, which is the mid-range one not the cheapie, was the first lens I bought. Very nice and capable lens for the money, and makes a pretty good walk around lens.
  • KA0TVOKA0TVO Registered Users Posts: 164 Major grins
    edited February 25, 2006
    15524779-Ti.gif
    I have the same gear. Got the kit with the 20D then later the Canon 28-105 3.5-4.5. My copy is very sharp and a great walk about lens. I recently purchased the Tamron 28-75 f2.8. for the extra speed. The 28-105 is great but a little slow for concerts and theatre.
    Bob
  • DanielBDanielB Registered Users Posts: 2,362 Major grins
    edited February 25, 2006
    true, the 28-105 is muchhhhh better build quality, has pretty fast USM, and is a great all-around starter lense...

    however, many times i find myself wanting someing on the much wider end.

    the 18-55 and the 1.6 crop make it a 28-88
    the 28-105 and the 1.6 make it a 44-168

    so you have to figuer out...
    A) how wide would you normally shoot
    B) whats the subject matter you wanna shoot
    C) do you wanna spend 240 dollars because i recommend the hood that comes with it.

    28-105 review, its the MkI but they're practicly the same
    18-55 review

    i recommend giving the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 a nice hard look. although it can be hard to find a good copy of one.
    Daniel Bauer
    smugmug: www.StandOutphoto.smugmug.com

  • Scott_QuierScott_Quier Registered Users Posts: 6,524 Major grins
    edited February 25, 2006
    I second the suggestion for the Tamron. I bought one (obviously) and either I got a good one or I don't know any better. My brother also bought one and he is very happy with it.

    My brother got the 18-55 when he bought his digital Rebal (the first version). I popped in on my camera (thinking I might be interested in buying it from him) and found it to have significant problems. I handed it back with a thanks.

    I know nothing about the 18-105 - never laid eyes on one.

    I hope this helps, fear it didn't.
  • GAUG3GAUG3 Registered Users Posts: 16 Big grins
    edited February 25, 2006
    I bought 28-105 recently. However, I am thinking about sending it back because it has a noticeable "squeak" when it attempts to focus. Other than that, it is pretty sharp. Hunts a good bit in low light.

    I hate to squat in this thread with my issues of this particular lense. Although I'm a noob to the SLR world, I don't think lenses are suppose to squeak. Or do they? ne_nau.gif
  • DanielBDanielB Registered Users Posts: 2,362 Major grins
    edited February 25, 2006
    GAUG3 wrote:
    Although I'm a noob to the SLR world, I don't think lenses are suppose to squeak. Or do they? ne_nau.gif

    lol3.gif nope, thats a bad thing... send it in. mine's never had any sound at all, its dead-quiet while focusing.thumb.gif
    Daniel Bauer
    smugmug: www.StandOutphoto.smugmug.com

Sign In or Register to comment.