Lens sugestion for Canon EOS A2

ronwhit · Apr 19, 2014

A long time Canon Fd (4 decades!) user here, about to be gifted with a Canon EOS A2 body. I know my Fd lenses won't work on the A2, so, assuming the A2 is in working condition, I'm seeking advice on a decent "all purpose" lens for this new addition. KEH has listed two 24/85 f 3.5/4.5 EF zooms in EX condition for $165 and 179, as well as a 28/105 F 3.5/5.6 EF macro USM for $115, also in EX condition. So, two questions. 1) is the EF series what I want for use with an EOS A2?, and, 2) would you fine folks recommend either of these two lenses ? If not, why not, and what would you consider a good substitute?

Thanks!

Peltigera · Apr 19, 2014

Yes, the EOS cameras use EF lenses (but NOT EF-S lenses or EF-M lenses).

I don't have either of those lenses so I cannot comment on them.

Chris Lange · Apr 19, 2014

In my opinion a fast 35 or 50 is far more versatile with film (irrelevant on digital thanks to ultra-high ISO capability) than a slow medium coverage zoom...why not see if you can get hold of a 35/1.x or 50/1.x for a good price?

gone · Apr 19, 2014

I used to have a cheap Canon 35-80 4, 5.6 zoom. It came on a Canon Rebel film camera that I bought the wife (she hated it because it was bigger than her little P&S). The reviews on it were generally terrible, and you can buy one for peanuts. Well....mine was a very nice lens! Handy focal length, made great images. Here's one that I liked from it. The 50 is supposed to be a good lens too. I'm sure it would be sharper than the 38-80, but that old plastic zoom was plenty sharp enough for me.

ronwhit · Apr 19, 2014

Peltigera, thanks for the info. This will help me avoid some confusion.

Chris, in general I agree with your comment, but I already have more than my share of Fd lenses, (and bodies to go with them) , including fast 35 and 50 mm. This A2 won't be my primary camera, and I want to try something a bit different with it.

Fixcinater · Apr 19, 2014

This Dead Link Removed knows more than I. I tend to use primes, so an f/4-5.6 looks terrible on paper to me. You can also use older lenses in stop-down mode, so anything M42 or Nikon mount is fair game. Lots of cheap options if you're willing to lose the automation and purchase a $2-15 adapter ring.

I know for longer zooms I was pleasantly surprised by the EF 70-210mm f/4.

ignatiu5 · Apr 19, 2014

I used the 28-105 on a variety of Canon bodies (including an A2) for years. The lens is compact, and I found the focal length range to be largely useful for much of what I shoot. Fairly quick and accurate autofocus. My images were fine. There are at least 3 different versions of the lens, if I remember correctly. I eventually sold it in favour of the 28-135 because I liked a longer focal length for portraits, and I wanted image stabilization. I've never owned the 24-85mm.

Poisson Du Jour · Apr 19, 2014

ronwhit said:
A long time Canon Fd (4 decades!) user here, about to be gifted with a Canon EOS A2 body. I know my Fd lenses won't work on the A2, so, assuming the A2 is in working condition, I'm seeking advice on a decent "all purpose" lens for this new addition. KEH has listed two 24/85 f 3.5/4.5 EF zooms in EX condition for $165 and 179, as well as a 28/105 F 3.5/5.6 EF macro USM for $115, also in EX condition. So, two questions. 1) is the EF series what I want for use with an EOS A2?, and, 2) would you fine folks recommend either of these two lenses ? If not, why not, and what would you consider a good substitute?

Thanks!

Yes, EF is for EOS bodies but not EF-S, which is for digital. I would also caution against picking up a lens with a plastic mount (common with a number of consumer-level packages): a number of these have been seen with deep gouges and cracks through rough use which are not repairable. Both lenses you mentioned are slow and of average performance in the EF line-up. The 28-105mm f3.5-5.6 is not a true macro lens, rather a near-focus. If you want a flying start into quality imaging (and the A2 is as good as it gets), ditch the lot of those EF lenses and angle for the 17-40 f3.5L lens. More of this single top-shelf zoom have been sold with EOS bodies (it works with both analogue and digital) than any other lens made by Canon. It's not a cheapie (nothing with 'L' tacked on the end will be, though prices now are much lower than they were 20 years ago); I bought mine speculatively after a number of lenses were stolen (including a 20mm f2.8, 100mm macro and 28-105mm f3.5 lenses) and would never ever wish for the lifted lenses to be returned given the quality. This lens could also be obtained second hand for quite a bit less than new and that's always worth considering. Having said that, it's all relative to the amount of quality you are seeking and the end result of your photography.

Now a few words of caution. One thing to be aware of with the A2 is the mode control dial is the known weak-point of that body with potential to strip and 'freewheel' usually secondary to forcing the dial around without pushing the release button, or having dirt get under it that abraids the pawl ring. Repair is simple and straightforward, but not a DYI. The back cover latch is also a known weak point after years of use. Neither of these niggles should put you off using such a fine camera.

andrewf · Apr 25, 2014

Use a 50mm 1.8 on mine but am on the lookout for something a bit wider as a walk around.

I owned a 24-85 years ago that I used in the digital realm but my copy had a serious front focus problem. Sent it to Canon Australian and they sent it back without fixing it. Sold it on gumtree. It was a decent lens, when it got focus but has wicked distortion at the wide end.

If I were you, I'd look for a bright 28mm or 35mm prime. But if you're set on a zoom, these zooms are considered reasonable and compare well against each other.

blockend · Apr 25, 2014

Not fast, but different and small, the recent Canon 40mm f2.8 pancake. I use one on an EOS 3000n. Also good on d*g*t*l.

spacer · Apr 25, 2014

I tend to keep my 50/1.8 on my A2E, a decent choice for a grab-n-go rig.

vsyrek1945 · Apr 26, 2014

ronwhit said:
A long time Canon Fd (4 decades!) user here, about to be gifted with a Canon EOS A2 body. I know my Fd lenses won't work on the A2, so, assuming the A2 is in working condition, I'm seeking advice on a decent "all purpose" lens for this new addition. KEH has listed two 24/85 f 3.5/4.5 EF zooms in EX condition for $165 and 179, as well as a 28/105 F 3.5/5.6 EF macro USM for $115, also in EX condition. So, two questions. 1) is the EF series what I want for use with an EOS A2?, and, 2) would you fine folks recommend either of these two lenses ? If not, why not, and what would you consider a good substitute?

Thanks!

Depends on whether you like to shoot wider or longer. My first zoom after I bought my EOS Elan in '95 was a first generation EF 35-135/3.5-4.5 the salesman at Executive Photo in NYC claimed was new, but I won't go into that here. I shot a lot of candids with it at my son's wedding reception that were compared favorably to what the paid photog put out with his MF TLR. I later got a 'flower symbol' 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM at one of the now-defunct NYC Camera Shows, and it became my most used lens for vacation and family event shooting until I switched over to the d*****l dark side in 2005.

Shortly after I decided last summer to stop letting all that well-aged film in my basement fridge sit idle, I replaced the Elan with a gently used EOS 5 and found a silver-finish 24-85/3.5-4.5 USM. So far, the 24-85's most intense test was an Easter Dinner and family afternoon at our son's in-laws this past weekend. So far, I haven't missed the extra 20 mm at the long end I had on the 28-105, and I like having 24 mm at wide end for interior shots.

If you're more of a traditionalist, go for the 50 mm. I bought an EF 50/1.8 II lens with my Elan body, but it saw limited use once I started shooting 400 and 800 speed C-41 and 200 speed E-6 films.

Thanks and regards,
Vince

film_man · Apr 29, 2014

blockend said:
Not fast, but different and small, the recent Canon 40mm f2.8 pancake. I use one on an EOS 3000n. Also good on d*g*t*l.

Yeap, love mine. My wife uses it a lot on her EOS 300 (aka Rebel 2000).

shutterboy · May 2, 2014

If you are looking for a good walk around zoom, I would suggest EF 24-70 F/2.8L. If you care about the weight and got extra money, try the Mark II version of the same lens. If you are looking for a prime, I would suggest Zeiss 50mm F/2 Makro Planar ZE. MUCH better than a Canon prime and cheaper.

What's your budget?

markaudacity · May 2, 2014

The 24-70L is a terrible choice for a walk-around on an A2. It's as big and as heavy as the camera itself, and the balance will be wacky.
If you want a zoom, the 24-85 USM and 28-105 USM are good lightweight zooms, depending on whether you want more long or more wide.

My advice is to put a 50/1.4 or 35 on there and go shoot. Avoid the 28/1.8, as tempting as it is, the sample variation is pretty extreme and it generally fails to live up to the hype of its max aperture.

shutterboy · May 2, 2014

markaudacity said:
The 24-70L is a terrible choice for a walk-around on an A2. It's as big and as heavy as the camera itself, and the balance will be wacky.
If you want a zoom, the 24-85 USM and 28-105 USM are good lightweight zooms, depending on whether you want more long or more wide.

My advice is to put a 50/1.4 or 35 on there and go shoot. Avoid the 28/1.8, as tempting as it is, the sample variation is pretty extreme and it generally fails to live up to the hype of its max aperture.

Okay. Maybe I was wrong. I use a EOS 1V and it feels pretty well balanced to me. But again, if you are that confident, I suppose you are right. What is your opinion about the Zeiss 50 vs Canon 50?

markaudacity · May 2, 2014

On an EOS 1v it makes a lot more sense, bigger/heavier camera. Do you have the battery grip on yours? I've always really liked the look of that camera with the grip.

I haven't used the Zeiss 50, but Canon's 50 is pretty dang good. I think it would mainly come down to whether AF is important or not.

shutterboy · May 2, 2014

markaudacity said:
On an EOS 1v it makes a lot more sense, bigger/heavier camera. Do you have the battery grip on yours? I've always really liked the look of that camera with the grip.

I haven't used the Zeiss 50, but Canon's 50 is pretty dang good. I think it would mainly come down to whether AF is important or not.

No, I do not have the battery grip. The grip with 8 AAs makes the camera 750g heavier. The lenses I use are generally pretty heavy on its own (like 24-70 F/2.8L, 70-200 F/2.8L IS II). I do not mind the weight, but I refuse to make the gear heavier than it needs to be. The battery grip (also a power booster), as I understand, mainly ramps up the burst shooting speed, something I do exclusively with digital.

I found the Canon 50 F/1.2L to be softer than the Zeiss F/2 at the edges. Plus, the Zeiss is a Makro Planar (albeit only at 1:2). Manual focus does not bother me since I also shoot with a battery less Hasselblad. So manual focus for me

markaudacity · May 2, 2014

Yeah the 50/1.2 seems mostly like a publicity stunt. I've only used the 1.4.

shutterboy · May 2, 2014

markaudacity said:
Yeah the 50/1.2 seems mostly like a publicity stunt. I've only used the 1.4.

Well, there's the weather sealing and the red ring bragging rights. The other day, I was walking on the street and found 2 photographers staring at me. One of them just noted the "1" on my camera and commented to the other in German (assuming I do not understand German) that I was wasting a "1" series camera by not using a lens with a red ring. The other one noted the Zeiss logo and just asked the former to shut up. Now that is what I call bragging rights

shutterboy · May 2, 2014

Also, to the original poster, if you have funds, you should try a Zeiss Otus 55mm F/1.4. One hell of a lens, but again probably too heavy for your camera.

markaudacity · May 2, 2014

Hehehe. Not bad.

ignatiu5 · May 2, 2014

shutterboy said:
Also, to the original poster, if you have funds, you should try a Zeiss Otus 55mm F/1.4. One hell of a lens, but again probably too heavy for your camera.

The OP asked for advice on a decent all purpose lens, specifically noting a couple of used sub US$200 EF variants, and you suggest a prime lens that retails for more than 20 times this amount. In what way is this helpful information?

shutterboy · May 2, 2014

ignatiu5 said:
The OP asked for advice on a decent all purpose lens, specifically noting a couple of used sub US$200 EF variants, and you suggest a prime lens that retails for more than 20 times this amount. In what way is this helpful information?

Oops, my bad. I assumed that the OP mentioned the sub 200$ lenses just because that is what was available from KEH. If you note, I had asked about his budget in my previous post. But suggesting the Zeiss was wrong on my part. I am sorry about it.

ronwhit · May 2, 2014

I guess it's time to hear from the OP.... I went with the 28/105 f 3.5/4.5 EM from KEH) due to: 1) budget constraints and, 2) the fact that I have a host of Fd lenses (have been using them for 40 years) and compatible bodies, including 20/24/28/35/50 etc. primes. I don't need any more primes and didn't want to spend a lot on a camera that was given to me with no guarantees of it being fully functional or suitable for my use. So far, everything seems to work well, and I'm pleased with my first foray into auto focus. And I remain impressed with the quality of gear from KEH, their conservative rating system, and customer service attitude. Thank you all for your inputs!

Lens sugestion for Canon EOS A2

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency