Canon EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

Buy Cheap Canon EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

Buy Low Price From Here Now
A highly portable lens with high optical performance and a light weight of 12 oz. (340g). A very practical ultra-wide-angle zoom. The large front lens group minimizes peripheral darkening, and the flare-blocking diaphragm minimizes flare. Also, with lens group 2 being the zoom group, distortion is corrected.
Readmore

Technical Details

- EF mount; ultra-wide zoom lens
- Inner focusing; full-time manual focus
- 20-35mm focal length
- f/3.5-4.5 maximum aperture
- Ring-type UltraSonic Motor (USM)
See more technical details

 "Fine performance for the price" 2007-04-26
By A photographer (Planet Earth)
The main problem with this lens is the speed, or the lack thereof. Compared to the EF 20/2.8, it's only a half stop slower but compared to the EF 35/2, it's one and a half stops slower. While this is not a big deal if you're shooting outside, you have a problem in low light environments. Secondarily, if you're shooting a small sensor DSLR, you're not getting the wide angle benefits of this lens.



For film or for full-frame 35mm sized sensor DSLR users, this is a good choice if you can live with the primary limitation of the slow speed. Optically, it's not bad at all. It has more distortion than an architectural photographer will want but if you're mainly shooting architecture you probably wouldn't be attracted to this lens anyway. As a reportage lens or a travel lens, it will serve well. Although it's relatively large--especially with the dinner plate sized lens hood in place--it's a lightweight. Build quality is industry-standard consumer grade for Canon. Which means it's actually very well put together from mostly plastic components. The lens mount is metal and the lens elements are, of course, glass. Autofocus is fast and the motor is a Canon Ultrasonic so you get the benefit of manual focus without having to flip switches to turn off the autofocus.



I've used this lens off and on for about eight years. I originally shot color nature and landscapes and this was a very useful lens for such purposes. I mostly used a tripod so having a slow lens wasn't a limitation. For the last few years, I have been doing only black and white film work with an emphasis on the artful aspects of photography. When I use 35mm, I've trimmed my most used lenses to mostly primes so this lens doesn't get selected as often as it once was. Still, when the light is bright, I sometimes use this lens for the convenience. It's very versatile with good performance. If used at medium apertures under the same lighting conditions, I seriously doubt anyone would be able to see any practical difference in photos made with this lens compared to one of the much more expensive L-series Canon zooms. For the price, it's very good value.

 "Great Lens" 2007-04-06
By J. M. Vuckovich
I love it. Im no pro but the wide angle is great for family pictures, weddings ect.

 "Affordable wide angle" 2007-03-22
By Fernando Valenzuela (California, USA)
This lens is good for those who are looking to get decent wide angle but don't have the budget for the EF 17-40 f/4L. In order to beat the quality of this lens you need to spend almost double.



I used the 20-35 on my Rebel XT which makes it equivalent to 32 to 56mm. It's not as wide as the EF-S 18-55 that came with the camera but the quality is much better. The ring type USM focuses fast and quietly. Overall, a great value for the price.



If you can afford it, I would step up to the 17-40 f/4L which gives you a little more range. If not, this is a decent alternative.



Another option to consider is the EF 20mm f/2.8. It's slightly faster but costs about $100 more.

 "Good lens but is it really worth $390?" 2005-08-01
By paparazzi83 (Honolulu, Hawaii)
I use this lens at work every day, and in general it's a very good lens. The optics are sharp, and the focus, athough not fast, is not something to complain about.



The only problem I have is that for $400 for a 20-35mm lens that's f/3.5 is a little pricey in my view. It's also not the sharpest lesn on the market, and when you can spend a another $200 for some 17-85mm IS I find it hard to justify buying this lens for the asking price.

 "Great for travel" 2003-07-20
By
This is a wonderful lens. It is especially nice for travel photos in cities, indoors, and for some landscapes. You also need to get a hood because of the wide angle of view. In addition, you need a filter to protect the lens as well as function as a filter -haze or polarizer. The filter must be a special wide angle filter (thin metal ring) and you won't be able to attach the lens cap over the filter. Small price to pay, however.


Images Product

Buy Canon EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras Now

Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

Buy Cheap Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

Buy Low Price From Here Now
Canon offers this ultra-wide zoom lens with portrait-length telephoto capability. By having multiple lens groups move during zooming, the lens was made compact and lightweight. The ashperical element suppresses distortion. High contrast is maintained at all focal lengths and sharp images are obtained.
Readmore

Technical Details

- EF mount; standard zoom lens
- Internal focusing; full-time manual focus; aspherical lens
- 24-85mm focal length
- f/3.5-4.5 maximum aperture
- Micro UltraSonic Motor (USM)
See more technical details

 "Bread and butter" 2008-07-26
By Mr. A. Pomeroy (Wiltshire, England)
This is a good-value lens that was designed back in the days of 35mm film cameras, although Canon still sells it as of 2008, and it works fine on Canon's digital models. It is a standard EF lens that will fit all of Canon's digital cameras. It is not one of those EF-S lenses that is restricted to the e.g. 400D / 40D range.



I believe it is one of the least glamorous lenses that Canon sells, in the sense that it has a moderate zoom range that is neither particularly wide nor particularly zoomy; it is not the cheapest, or the most expensive EF lens; it is not the most or the least fully-featured; it is neither flimsy nor rock-solid. It uses USM focus, which is silent and generally accurate. It doesn't have image stabilisation. It doesn't have a constant aperture. The zoom range is roughly 40-135mm on a x1.6 cropped sensor body, such as a Canon 400D / 40D. The zooming mechanism on my example doesn't creep. The closest focus distance seems relatively far, something like a foot and a bit. The manual focus ring feels a bit cheap, but then again the autofocus is fast and quiet, so it balances out. It has a 67mm filter thread, which is an odd size.



I have had a chance to take a few shots on a tripod at different apertures. At f3.5 it has a nice tight field of view, and it is decently sharp; it seems to jump up in sharpness between f5.6 and f8, and doesn't get much sharper beyond that. On my 35mm Canon 600, with an uncropped field of view, there is noticeable distortion at both the wide and the tele ends. This is less noticeable on a cropped 350D, although it is still noticeable. Otherwise the image quality has no obvious glaring deficiencies. The background blur is pleasant. I found that I had to underexpose by a stop to get the exposure just right, but that might be me, or the camera.



It's attractive as a useful, well-priced walkabout lens for digital cameras, for people who don't mind the relatively tight field of view (40mm is just slightly wideangle). The only problem I can see is that the zoom bellows seems to suck up dust. My example had quite a few specks, although apparently this has an almost unnoticeable effect on image quality. It's a shame that Canon doesn't include a lens hood.

 "Make that 3.5 stars" 2008-07-20
By Coronet Blue (California)
Here's another case where it all depends on how you use it and what you expect. Personally, I like really sharp images. This means, I can photograph something that has a lot of detail and examine the corners of the image at 100 - 200% and "read" what's there. If this sounds like you, then this isn't what you're looking for (unfortunately, neither is the 24-70 L but its much closer).



If you just enjoy taking pictures and want a good, "walk around" lens that's not ridiculously heavy, you'll love this lens--and believe me, I envy you.



Sharpness. Its reasonably sharp at all apertures except wide open. No big deal since few lenses are great, wide open. Nothing is blurry (at least on an SLR with 1.6 crop factor) but nothing will make you break into a smile at the devastating crispness, either. Best f-stop was between 5.6 and 8, just where it should be.



Chromatic aberration. Not great, but there is something about digital cameras that makes even the most well corrected lenses show some "CA". If you can live with good-not-great sharpness, the CA shouldn't be a concern.



Barrel distortion. Gracious. The test at photozone_de should have prepared me for this, but at the 24mm end this lens is almost in semi-fisheye territory. So....flowers, people and landscapes, fine. Walls, windows and anything flat or square, not fine. Correctable in Photoshop but tedious to get just right.



Construction. Space age Polycarbonate (plastic). Seems fine to me. From the comments on "build quality" you'd think every doctor on vacation in Tahiti was embedded in Afghanistan. Its a precision item, made out of plastic but it looks to me like it will be fine, unless dropped. I did notice that dust gets inside but since lenses do not take pictures of themselves this shouldn't affect image quality. Dust sure hasn't hurt my ancient view camera lenses.



Focusing. The ultrasonic motor works flawlessly. Fast and silent.



So that's it. For me, the sharpness and barreling were an issue. But its a perfectly usable lens; just not a great one. Reasonably priced, too. While I wait for a spectacular L wide angle zoom, I'm going to get the 50 macro and probably the 35/2 as well. Not very convenient, I admit, but along with the Tokina 12-24 and my 70-200 L, I should be in good shape.

 "very good lens - underrated" 2008-02-01
By Louis Jaffe (San Francisco, CA USA)
I had been using the 24-85 for years on a series of Canon DSLRs starting with the original d30 and culminating with the 5d. Finally decided to spring for the 24-105L. I was immediately surprised that pix from the new lens didn't look so great as 3-4X higher price would suggest. Detailed comparisons showed the 24-85 was just as good in many instances. One edge (not the other) of the 24-105L was a bit better, but center sharpness was no better, even wide open. Contrast seemed equally good. I returned the 24-105L to the dealer and kept the 24-85. While it's true the zoom range is less, I also like the much lighter weight and more compact form of the 24-85.

 "Excellent outdoor lens for a 1.6x camera" 2007-08-09
By James Kirk (Florida)
Okay, so you are like me and think that standard 18-55, 17-55, or 17-50 zooms are too short for some outdoor events, but telephoto lenses are too long. SO you want a good in between. There are several choices including the Canon 17-85mm, Canon 28-135mm, the Canon 24-85, the Canon 28-105mm, and the Canon 24-105mm. While I would really prefer the Canon 24-105mm L series, it is very expensive, heavy, and large. The ones that start at 28mm aren't wide enough, so that leaves the 24-85mm.



The 24-85mm F3.5-4.5 lens is excellent for a midrange medium zoom on a 1.6x camera. Image quality, even wide open, is far better than the 18-55 kit lenses, plus you get USM with FTM, and a wider aperture. However, this lens really is best used in the F5.6-11 range, where the sharpness is quite good. Contrast and color are excellent at pretty much all apertures. Focusing is fast and accurate, and it has a nice distance meter.



The main downsides to this lens are it's mediocre build quality, which is a little wobbly at least on my copy, and the focus and zoom rings could have better feel. However, if you are comming from the kit lens or another cheap lens, it is right on par.



If you compare it to the 17-85mm, the 24-85mm isn't as WA and doesn't have IS, but it has FF capability, much better edge and center sharpness at all apertures, a faster aperture, lower price, and is a little more compact.



For full frame cameras, it covers a very important range, the wide zoom, which often used indoors, would preferably have good F2.8 IQ for indoors, something like the Tamron 28-75mm, or preferably the Canon 28-70mm, which is excellent indoors FF.



Overall, if you can get the Canon 24-105mm instead, it's definitely a much better lens in every respect. But if you don't want to spend that, this is a great lens at 1/3 the cost.

 "Beginners: Good lens but don't buy it!" 2006-07-11
By gogolplexer (Toronto, Canada)
I bought my first SLR camera about two and a half years ago ( a Rebel K2 film camera with kit lens ) before the birth of my daughter. As I became more familiar with photography and hungrier for better picture quality I bought the very cheap 50mm f/1.8 lens and was impressed by how much better the picture quality was.



That motivated me to spend some money and buy this lens with my Rebel Digital XT. This is a good zoom lens-- much better then the lens that comes with the camera. Compact, lightweight with good picture quality. A great value for the money. That's why I gave it 4 stars.



But after a few months I decided to go all out and buy the 24-70mm f/2.8L. WOW!!! "L" glass blows this lens away!



Okay, my advice to beginners is this: If you're buying an SLR camera its because you want to go beyond the normal point and shoot experience to more creative exposures and better picture quality. You're willing to pay much more for these qualities otherwise you wouldn't even consider an SLR. Don't go cheap on the lens. Nothing is more important than optics when it comes to camera equipment. Go all out and buy the L -lenses-- you won't regret it!



Yes they're expensive but they can last a lifetime and they hold their value very well. I don't use my 24-85 anymore so it was pretty much a waste of money. Save yourself some money and buy the 24-70 f/2.8L. The pictures you take will last longer than the memory of the money you spent.




Images Product

Buy Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras Now

Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

Buy Cheap Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras

Buy Low Price From Here Now
The EF28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM retains the optical capability of the highly popular EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM lens, with a refined exterior design. Includes ring-type USM drive for silent, high-speed autofocusing, plus full-time manual focusing. The compact design is a good match for the EOS A2/A2E or ELAN 7/7E with built-in flash. An excellent zoom lens for everyday use.
Readmore

Technical Details

- 28-105mm standard zoom lens with f/3.5-4.5 maximum aperture for Canon SLR cameras
- Ring-type ultra-sonic monitor (USM) provides silent, high-speed autofocusing
- 1.6-foot close focusing distance; rotating zoom system; 58mm filter size
- Ideal for Canon EOS A2/Aw3 or ELAN 7 series cameras with built-in flashes
- Measures 2.8 inches in diameter and 3 inches long; weighs 13.2 ounces
See more technical details

 "An excellent sleeper lense!" 2009-11-23
By J. Rios (So. Cal)
As a model photographer who often does outdoor photoshoots at Joshua Tree, I needed an excellent compact zoom lense which would give me more reach than what I already had, Tamron 28-75 f2.8, because I often found myself too far away on one boulder while the model was on another. Well, the Canon 28-105 f3.5-4.5 lense fulfills this purpose. Even though it's slower, I still get good DOF (depth of field) and the speed hasn't been a problem; of course, that would not be the case if one was using this lense in low light situations. Not only that, but I've noticed that it, on the average, gives sharper pictures than my Tamron lense. The lense is very compact, having the size and weight of my Canon 85 f1.8 lense which is another plus allowing me to have the lense on the camera in my backpack without taking up much space. It's actually more compact than the Tamron and I'm able to use the same size B+W filters as my Canon 85mm f1.8 and 50mm f1.4 lenses, which saved me money. So I heartily recommend this lense for anyone who needs a good quality moderate length zoom lens and can't afford to pay $800+, I paid $250 for it. This lense won't disappoint.

 "Inconsistant results with 2004 Rebel" 2009-08-21
By R.P.D. (New York City)
I have found the image results from this lens in combination with my 2004 Canon Rebel to be incredibly inconsistent. It can not take the same picture twice in a row. Color values, saturation, and particularly focus vary widely with each shot, even in multi-shot mode.



This lack of predictability makes capturing images a crap-shoot at best. More than a few times I have been disappointed with the results. I would not recommend this lens, particulary for older Digital Rebels.

 "Fantastic Lens" 2009-07-14
By J. Sewell (East Bay, California)
The Canon EF 28-105mm lens was a great purchase. I could bring it anywhere for those every day shots and still zoom in or out as much as I needed! My portraits and scenery shots turned out great. The quality of the lens is very durable and I have loved the crispness of my pictures using this lens. A great buy if you only have enough money to purchase one lens for your SLR.

 "Great value lens with good quality" 2009-06-08
By A. Pacheco (hawaii)
After purchasing my first dslr (Canon Rebel XSI) I quickly discovered that the kit 18-55 just didn't have the range I needed. I somehow landed a job doing freelance work for the local newspaper the same day I got my camera, so I needed something that would give me more versatility on a very limited budget. After reading the reviews I ended up with this, and I've been pleased.



Granted, this is not an "L" lens, but at this price I wouldn't expect that. Also, if you have shaky hands or take a lot of photos in low light this may not be the right lens for you. It might be worth looking into the 55-250 IS. In decent light this lens takes beautiful photos, and I've had many successful results with it. It is great outdoors (I recommend purchasing a lens hood).



I recently purchased my first "L" lens--the 17-40mm, and while it's a great lens, the 28-105 still lives on my camera for its versatility. And even though I'm now in the market for something with IS, faster, and with more range, I think I'll still be hanging on to this one for awhile. If I wasn't serious about photography as a career and used this as just a hobby lens I would be thrilled. If you want something affordable with decent quality, I highly recommend this.

 "Another great lens by Canon" 2009-05-28
By Imejasan_Photog (California, USA)
This is another great, standard zoom lens by Canon. To save money, I have tried lenses from different manufacturers. Eventually, however, I end up coming back to Canon. Why? 1. Build quality: Canon lenses, even the "cheapie" ones, are well-built. I don't "baby" my camera equipment, my canon lenses seem to last a lot longer than off-brand lenses. The 28-105mm telephoto lens is rugged and well-built; I expect it will last a long time. 2. Optical quality. Here again, Canon lenses outperform all other similarly priced lenses. Canon glass gives me better quality photos than other comparably priced glass. The images that I have obtained using the 28-105mm lens are sharp and well-defined. 3. The Canon autofocus system in the 28-105mm lens is fast and quiet. I have used this lens to track moving action and invariably it can bring images to focus quickly and VERY quietly. The quiet part is important to me because I photograph animals in natural settings and there is nothing more distracting that the loud "whirring" of a cheap AF lens disturbing your subject. I recommend this lens to anyone looking for a standard telephoto lens with quick, quiet AF, great build quality, sharp optics and a price that won't put a major dent on your wallet. My only complain is that Canon should include the lens hood as part of the standard package - a lens case would also be nice to have.


Images Product

Buy Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras Now