| Field-test of the Canon EF 28-105mm
f/3.5-4.5 II USM zoom lens. Canon's EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM zoom lens has been around for years, even before EOS models like the EOS-1N/1N RS and EOS 50/50E were introduced to the market. Therefore, it is not a surprise to see that Canon has introduced a new version of this popular zoom lens for the new millennium - the EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM. Unlike most of the other EF zoom and single focal length lenses, which are of new optical designs and in some cases, employing the Image Stabilizer (IS) feature, the new EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM retains the construction of the original as well as the overall appearance. Well, almost - the new lens also has a new design for its zooming ring. If this is the case, what is the attraction for an EOS user/owner of the original version for him/her to justify upgrading to the new lens? Only one: better lens barrel construction - the original version was designed entirely with polycarbonate materials while the new zoom has been constructed with a much solid body; from the lower part, which is of the same type used on certain L-series lenses like the EF 135mm f/2.0L USM and EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM.
Of course, if you think that the new design is not worth the upgrading exercise from the original version, don't worry about that since the old lens is still very much an excellent performer and still be good for years to come. However, if you are a freelance or full-time photographer (some pros do use this lens), where your EOS equipment is subjected to abuses and lots of shooting daily, then the new EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM is well worth the investment if you decide to upgrade from the original version. This is because other than the tougher construction used on the lower part of the lens barrel, the internal zooming cam of the newer version is also constructed of metal as opposed to the polycarbonate type designed for the original. What this means is that unlike the original version, the new zoom lens is less likely to develop wear and tear in its internal zooming cam (which can affect image sharpness in the long term) despite heavy usage by the photographer. For those who are owners of the original version or have used it, you will know what I am talking about. That's not to say that the original lens is bad, for those who don't use the zoom as frequently as the freelancers and professionals do, they won't be facing this problem. << Back to Main . 1 . 2 . 3 . |
||||||||||||||
