If your bathroom is looking a little rundown, we're the ones for you. www.bathroomremodelstamford.com Our Stamford contractors can come to your home and upgrade it with everything from new tiles to ceiling fans so that you have an oasis in which to relax at the end of each day.

none so far

Cheap Lightweight Picture quality quite good Adequate and versatile enough for most casual/holiday shots. | Brick Masonry

Not sharp enough

Cheap
Nice for soft Pictures
Dont care if you break it
Can be modified into a poor man's Macro lense.

Light and cheap feel
smaller apature
Slow Focus
Not good where sharp is needed.

I bought a RebelX-Speedlite-bag-cleaning bundle on ebay just to get at this lense, I wanted to continue to grow my line of lenses for my Rebel XTi and it was cheap enough. If you divide the cost by the number of items I got (4) the lense only cost me $11.50

After using this lense with my XTi I found it to be a good quality lense. Sure it may not be "Stock Photography" quality if your looking for a sharp image, otherwise it offers a quality image. I found that it takes very nice soft pictures on the XTi's No-Flash pre-set in a medium lit room using a lamp with a cream lamp shade. A lens hood is a good partner for this lense.

The stock 18-55mm that came with my XTi is slightly sharper to give you an idea and a little heavier. They are both just as loud though the 35-80mm is rather slower and wouldnt be good for sports. The 18-55mm also has a larger apature.

Another reason that I bought this lens is that it can be modified into a poor mans maco lens. I saw some vividly sharp up close pictures used with this lens when modified. Just do a google search to find the information and pictures.

I can say that for the money this is a worth while lense to add to your collection. If you were to pay anything more than $50 for it though and it doesnt become as good of a deal.

You can pick one up with your lunch money

It's a joke.

Here's the scoop as others have stated. Most people who own this lens got it free with a kit purchased in the mid-90's. That may be the only good thing about it. It is not sharp enough to be used for work that will be sold. The autofocus is not as accurate as it should be and it is very very slow. After a year or so of use the autofocus motor will begin to squeel like a pig.

If you can't recognize a non-sharp image then this may be the lens for you.

Similar Products Used:

Most of the canon line.

Really cheap, sharp, nice bokeh (!). A lot of lens for your money!

Really none given the price, optical quality etc. If I have to say something, it would have to be that it could have been faster (but then it wouldn't have had this price).

I got this lens for an EOS film body just over a year ago. A month later I gave the camera to somebody else and got a digital body instead, with only this lens at first. I was very, very happy with the results I got from it, I have taken some beautiful sharp portraits and flower pictures with a very nice and "soft" bokeh with this "el-cheapo" lens (the bokeh was sure not something I'd expect, but it sure is there - subject sharp and nicely separated from a beautiful blurry background!). The only thing I missed, was a wide angle, using it on a 1.6X crop body, so I decided to also pick up an EF-S 18-55mm since I couldn't afford an extreme wide angle at that time. Since then I have also got some other lenses, amongst them the EF 50mm f1.8 and the EF 70-200mm f4L, but I have not for a minute considered dropping this one. It still sits in my bag for when I want a bit more focal length than the digital rebel kit lens gives combined with having zoom, and I also feel that it gives very pleasent colors and skin tones, so it is a clear winner for people photography in good lighting when I don't need the real long focal lengths. This lens is of course not of an "L-quality" build, but in my honest opinion it is more than well enough built for most of us. Most of us do treat our equipment carefully. I do think that it's build quality seems quite a bit better than the EF-S 18-55mm. For those who need something cheap to get them started, and they don't need wide angle too often, this is a real good choice, I think. If you plan on getting a real wide angle (as the EF-S 10-22, the Sigma 10-20 or something like that), this could be the perfect companion for that, IMO. And, it is really cheap, especially you can do a real bargain on these on eBay now (even cheaper than last year). You can e.g. pick up this used, a new Sigma 10-20 and a used EF 50/1.8 - as a quite reasonable alternative to one 2.8 wide-normal zoom. Then you should have a lot of photo opportunities covered (if you don't mind changing lenses that is). Not a bad option at all, if you ask me!

Customer Service

Haven't had any need for customer service for any of my lenses (but I also bought all of them but one slightly used).

Similar Products Used:

EF-S 18-55, EF 50/1.8, EF 70-200/4L, Sigma 70-300

all.

none

This is a very very good lens for the price; you will get fine pics both w analogue as well as digital. I and another friend an photog use this in our studio w an canon d30 with great results it is almost as sharp as the 70 -200 f 2,8 L in the 80 mm end,and better saturated!? the coatings seems very good.! please remember it holds an aspherical glass and one ud element inside.This factor makes it an very overseen lens and this version is better than the Usm version as well. We use it both with D30 and 1 D and Eos -1 for film.The saturation is genius. BUT it is ONLY If you find a GOOD sample.!! IF not it is Horrible! Good hunting

Customer Service

nope

Similar Products Used:

mnay

comes out quite crisp and sharp for the price good colour(maybe a good coating?) light fast better than 28-80 acc to my experince its stronger than you think

Not supersharp a little toyish plastic feeling would be nice IF it was 2,8-4,0.

This was one lens i got free with an EOS something many yrs ago.Time passes but i went back with this lens mainly when i travelled and i noticed that the quality isnt that bad at all.My version is crisp and sharp and sometimes astonish me by its performance.I think it might be a little underrated in the Canon Line,so if you need a lightweight good zoom you might get it a chance-You might be lucky and get a good sample like me.Its still in my bag when i travel.Good Luck! Reg Pic Quality; (please remember its not always the lens but the wo-(man)behind the cam that take the pic!

Customer Service

None needed

Similar Products Used:

many different types from nikon canon and more

Cheap Lightweight Picture quality quite good Adequate and versatile enough for most casual/holiday shots Filter thread 52mm, can easily find filters

Not sharp enough for big enlargements Not compact

Quality of photos fairly good. Most people find them acceptable.

Customer Service

Not needed

Similar Products Used:

Canon EF 28-80mm

Cheap but very useful. Light and takes good images.

4.0-5.6 max aperture (hope it was a 2.8). slow focusing in low light situations.

One of my favorite lens. Came free when I bought an EOS 88 kit. Focal length is nice 35 on a wide prespective, then 80 for zooming in. Color is also good. I use it for doing weddings, portraits and outdoor model portfolios - and its d*** good and light! Its a very good "all-around" lens.

Customer Service

Not Needed

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 24-70, Canon 28-105, Nikon 35-85, Canon 36-78

Light, fast autofocus.

None that I can find for the type of photography I do using this lens.

Oh dear - what a lot of poor press the EF 35-80 f/4-5.6 III got. Some of it undeserved I feel. This lens came with the camera (EOS 1000NF) purchased back in 1995. Since then, I have used it extensively mainly for outdoor architectural photography and occasionally for flowers. I can honestly say it hasn't done that badly. With a good ISO-100 film and the camera mounted on a tripod the photos are as sharp as an Olympus Trip-35 (Zuiko lens) and would give an Olympus 50mm f1.8 (Zuiko) on an OM-10 a good run for its money. I have not experienced any of the colour or sharpness probelms mentioned in some of the earlier reviews. If there was any lack of sharpness, it would have resulted from camera shake, not the optics. The lens performs well at 50, 60 and 80mm. But it goes without saying that a stable camera (mounted on a tripod), a lens hood and a good film will give good results. Try capturing sunsets or daffodils in spring. Avoid Kodak film and Kodak developers, such as those 1-hour kiosks on the High Street and especially supermarkets! Take the film to a reputable developer. While I agree that the optics can determine photo quality - a little technique in the art of photography can go a long way.

Customer Service

Not needed it.

Similar Products Used:

vivitar 28-200mm, AF Nikkor 35-70mm & Olympus non auto focus.