A good thing to start with is a Canon EF 50 mm f:1,8(get the model I if
possible, it is all glass and has a metal EF bajonet...)

The you could combine that with a Canon 28 mm  and perhaps a 85 and 135 mm
lense.

You could also go for the Canon 24-70 f:2,8 L lense, great lense, at a great
price...

Best regards

Ren?

Gill Hall (hallsub@aol.comnojunk) wrote...

How big is your budget?

The 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 USM II (for around £200) will be noticeably
sharper (especially at larger apertures) than the 28-90.  Make sure
you get the f3.5-4.5 version, though, and not the f4-5.6, which will
be just as lamentable as your current lens.

This lens is tested (against the 28-90) on the following page:

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/28zooms/

With a bigger budget (around £400), the 28-135 IS lens is generally
well-rated.  You get a longer zoom range, and the image stabilisation
function, which typically lets you shoot about 2 f-stops slower than
you can normally manage handheld.  Optically, it's reported to be
pretty much on a par with the 28-105.  Downsides are that it is
heavier...

A non-Canon alternative that some are reviewing well is the Tamron
28-75 f2.8, which goes for around £300.  This is reported to rival
Canon's 24-70 f2.8 lens (£1200!) for optical quality.

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005V6Z

If you want to go the primes route, then the Canon 28 f2.8, 50 f1.8
and 85 f1.8 all are good optical performers.  The set of three will
set you back in the region of £500 or so.  The 28mm and 85mm are
reasonably well built, but the 50mm has all the build quality that
you would expect for its £80 price....it's a great lens for the
money, but will not survive harsh treatment.

The low-cost alternative is to try and find a used Canon 28-70 f3.5-
4.5 II lens.  These are typically offered by the likes of ffordes,
MXV, Mifsuds etc. at around £70 or so, and are said to offer
comparable or better image quality than the 28-105 lens.  The
downside is that these lenses have a much older, noisier, slower
autofocus motor than the current USM system used.  Full-time manual
focusing is not available.  Having said that, I have one of these
lenses, and having considered "Trading up" to a 28-105, 24-85 or 28-
135 IS have decided it really is not worth it.

Hope some of this helps....

Ian

Hi Gill

Excuse the late reply - have only just started to subscribe to this group.

I traded my original Olympus OM10 when it packed up for a Canon EOS with
35-80 and 75-300mm zooms. I was immediately taken aback by just how crap the
zooms were when compared to my old 28 / 50 / 85mm Zuiko's. Even my cheap
Vivitar 80-200 was sharper than the Canon's. It surprised me then as I
thought that Camera maker's own lenses were supposedly superior.

Since then I have replaced the zooms with 28 / 50 / 135 EF lenses and am
hoping to get an 85mm soon. I also have a Tamron 19-35 zoom which whilst not
as good as the primes is better than either of the Canon zooms I had. The
results from the primes are way better than I have ever had from the stock
zoom lenses. Oh - they cost me ?300 in all from ebay and all were in mint
condition. It's surprising just how popular the standard zooms are on ebay
(considering how crap they are) - you may just get yourself one of the
primes for the price you sell your zoom.

Good luck - and don't look back!!!!

Roger