It is light, has a very fast AF and produces sharp pictures on analog EOS 300V and digital EOS 20D. With this lens you can shoot beautiful macro-photos too. Used Lenses are reasonable priced.

Rotating filterbase is not so good for polarizing filter. Manual focusing is possible - distance marks would be nice.

Fastest focusing EVER !
Great colour enlargements at 10X8 , A4 , will go to 11X14 .
Great Workhorse , good money earner .
Cheap & readily replaceable , haven't had to replace in five years , touch wood !
I find the manual focus easy to use !
Nice & Light .
Stylish , but not big , doesn't frighten clients .
And that plastic is tough !!!

You have to watch slamming it against doors by accident , I've done this half a dozen times , I was born reckless & careless , but still that stylish little dinky lens survives !

Maybe it's tougher than we think ?

Wondering why most of the reviewers are knocking that great little lens , that fab little performer , the Canon EF 28 - 90 mm kit lens ?

I simply cannot understand all the bad remarks about this lens . As a Pro Photographer I was faced with taking family portraits with the Bishop fast, and I mean fast , after Confirmation ceremonies , you don't get a second, hardly to breathe when they start queuing up , early on I had to abandon my Bronica SQA , my Mamiya 645 , my Nikon N90S , all eleven of of my Pro / Prosumer cameras , to keep up with the job ( Three of my DSLRs too as Digital does not suit large print jobs like this, even my Fuji S Pro or Sony Alpha ) .

I tried my old Canons 620 and 300V , both with this lens , and , voila , they turned out to be the fastest handling and focusing of all my cameras and lenses ! As a Pro you work with what is best for the job , and I found the Canon 28-90 to be the fastest for this particular job which earns me about 6,5oo EURO a year , not to be sneezed at in the present economic circumstances( I also get weddings to shoot as a result of the fab colour it produces from many of the families concerned through the years ) .

Then roll on the First Holy Communions and all ther little tots and more money from the Canon 28-90 rolling in , about 3,500 Euro , making a tidy sum of 10,000 EURO every year pn Confo's and Communions alone , that's the way a Pro works in Ireland, fast and hard !

And I reckon top Pro's like David Bailey would use something similar if faced with the same situation of taking 30 10X8 enlargements in a frantic rush inside an hour , posing the families , finding out what each wants , taking their names ( and cash ! ) and shooting !!!

And so it's plastic , so what , it does the job , and in my hands always to perfection , it has never let me down on that job over five years now . So it's light , all the better, so it's cheap , God forbid !

But I am convinced that it must be amongst the fastest - focusing Canon lenses you can get , and that's what I need on this particular job .

Back in 1966 my fellow Nikon-wielding Press Pro's laughed at me for using a Pentax Spotmatic and SMC Takumar lens for press wortk , now they know why !!!

It's great for outdoor portraiture , the 28-90 in my vast experience of it , delivers great colour , contrast and resolution on the job , and . I don't care if it breaks , I have another one backing up , and now , thanks to all the propaganda , it only costs me 30 Euro on ebay to replace .

John Lennon used to do the same with the harmonicas he played on stage and in studio with the Beatles , buy cheapo ones , dump them , and buy more cheaps all the time .

Seriously , from experience of turning out lovely 10X8 colour enlargements all the time with this lens from Reala and Superia film , I am convinced that it deserves a nuch higher rating amongst its peers . Yes I probably prefer my Canon 28-70 ( not L ) , but I don't risk it out there amongst all the pushing and shoving , the Canon 28-90 is the perfect lens for the scrum , use it , toss it , buy another and another .

But for the amateur ( meaning not doing it for the money ) the Canon 28-90 lens is as good as anybody will need and should last years . Therefore I give it a rating on the job of 5 out of 5 , I'd give it 6 out of 5 if I could , especially after all the money it makes me !!!Hey , wait a minute , maybe they're all running this fab little lens down deliberately so it will be cheaper on ebay?

So rush over to ebay and get one for half nothing, quick now that I have let the cat out of the bag !!!

Michael . Michael McGrath The Studio Kilkenny City Ireland

( PS , Sad news I heard , Fuji Reala film gone ! ) .

Customer Service

Never had to use it .

Similar Products Used:

all manner of lenses over 44 years as a photographer .

Light, cheap

not very solid, difficult (but not impossible) manual focusing)

If you buy it in a kit with a 3000v/Rebel K2 or 300v/Rebel Ti it comes almost for free!! (less than 50 $). And it's pretty useful if you don't have too many lenses(3x zoom). Do not expect professional results, however. Advice: avoid extreme focals: visible distortion at 28 mm). Also avoid the maximum apertures (4-5.6)

-Price -Focal range

-Blurred pictures -28mm shots distorted

Sad lens. The only way I can get a sharp picture is to use a tripod and remote (even in daylight!) Even then, pictures are too soft. I'm disappointed considering I have the big brother of this lens (75-300) and it does just fine.

Customer Service

N/A

Similar Products Used:

75-300 F/4-5.6 II USM

Good performance for the price

Looks cheap. Autofocus could be better.

Nice lens despite of the very cheap look. Sharpness and distortion are ok for the price tag, after all it's an under $100 3x zoom range lens. Focusing is not lightning fast but ok for amateur use.

Similar Products Used:

Several Canon USM lenses, including image stabil. zooms.

Fast AF!! REAL FAST!

Plastic Feel, plastic everywhere......

Great beginner lens, came with the camera so i didnt bother. One day i went out, and i forgot my wide angle zooms at home, and i only had this little sucker in the bag. I was kinda terrified to use it, felt so plasticy and weak, i didnt know if i was going to break it while turning it. In the end, it was surprisingly sharper than expected.

Similar Products Used:

Tamron AF 28-200mm XR Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Canon 28-70mm f/2.8L USM

Sharp, colorful and contrasty Light Fast and reasonable silent AF

Cheap appearance Lacks marks for MF The f/5.6 at 90 mm is not enough for nice blurred backgrounds on portraits

It came with the 300v kit, thus it is a DC mark II version. Because of the reviews on the 28-90, I also purchased the 50 mm f/1.8 II, which is supposed to be a very good lense. As a result of this, I started to compare both lenses. The result shows that the 50 mm f/1.8 II is a superior lense, but the winning margin of such lense against the 28-90 is very, very, very tight. I could not figure out why the 28-90 is considered to be such a bad lense. I took pictures with the 28-90 at 50 mm at 1500 f/4.5, at 250 f/9.5 and at 60 f/22 in order to compare with the 50 mm lense at the same shutter speeds and apertures. I used a tripod, Agfa Vista 100 and Fuji Superia 200 for my tests. The photos were printed at 10 x 15 cm and 15 x 21 cm. All pictures taken with the 28-90 came very colorful, contrasty and sharp. The photos taken at 28 and 90 mm were very sharp as well. I could not verify any significant distortion. I would like to know how the people who make bad comments about this lense support their experience. Have they made any comparison? Have they made any test? Now, I do think that such people rely their opinion only on the cheap appearance of this consumer lense instead of its optics. Another possibility relies on a potential optical difference between the mark I version and mark II version, as nearly all bad comments are related to previous version. Does anyone have a similar opinion to mine?

Customer Service

N/A

Similar Products Used:

50 mm f/1.8 II