Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-85mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic, for writing a review, me has provided Alexey Kornev.
Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-85mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic Review
The Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-85mm 1:3.5-4.5 USM is a small, nice stock zoom lens. The lens is designed for full-frame cameras. When used on cropped cameras EGF The lens will be 38,4-136mm, so the Canon 24-85mm F / 3.5-4.5 USM loses its status as a 'universal lens' on a crop. Worth highlighting aperture F / 3.5-4.5, which is much better than the F / 3.5-5.6 that a number of similar lenses have. Canon 24-85mm f / 3.5-4.5 USM has been produced since 1996, my copy was shot with a film camera. There are two versions of this lens with different body frame colors - black and silver.
At the lens fast, quiet, internal focus. When zooming, the front lens does not rotate. The Canon 24-85mm F / 3.5-4.5 USM has a focus mode switch 'AF / MF', in manual focus mode the ring rotates 90 degrees. The focus ring is not rubberized, but it’s nice to drive it. The lens supports continuous manual focus mode. There is also a focus distance scale and infrared shift marks for 24, 28, 50, 85mm. MDF is 50 cm. At 85 mm focal length you can get a "macro" with an increase of 1: 6.3.
Optical design of the Canon EF 24-85mm f / 3.5-4.5 USM lens. Green indicates an aspherical element. Photo taken from the Canon website.
Canon 24-85mm f / 3.5-4.5 USM is made in Japan, has a metal mount and a rubberized zoom ring. The diameter of the front filter is 67mm, you can buy the native Hood EW-73II hood for the lens. With prolonged use, my copy has a little backlash in the zoom mechanism, while the lens trunk may spontaneously lengthen. The number of aperture blades is 6 pieces. The aperture can be closed down to F / 22 @ 24mm, F / 32 @ 85mm.
Sample Photos
Canon 24-85mm F / 3.5-4.5 USM creates the expected image: 24mm distortion, good sharpness in the center of the frame, good contrast, slight fear of backlight, sometimes strong HA. On covered apertures, it is sharp across the entire field of the frame on my cropped Canon 350D.
The parameters of the photo in the review:
All shot on Canon EOS 350D using protective filter Sunpak 67mm UV made in Japan. On-camera JPEG L, high quality. Noise reduction at slow shutter speeds was turned off. Parameters: contrast correction - 0, sharpness - 0, saturation - 0, tone color - 0. Used white balance: 'Auto' and 'Cloudy'. The size of the photos has been reduced to 1350 px by 900 px.
My experience
The dimensions of the lens are really small. When zooming, the rear lens works like a pump, which can affect the excess dust inside the camera. Of course, the Canon 24-85mm F / 3.5-4.5 USM does not create some kind of super image quality. But still, the lens can be a very, very cheap alternative to a full-time camera lens. It is a pity, now the new lens is almost never found on sale. I liked the Canon 24-85mm F / 3.5-4.5 USM more than its longer telephoto brother Canon Zoom Lens EF 28-105 mm 1: 3.5-4.5 USM.
Option in gray frame
Lens prices in popular stores can look at this link.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Conclusions
Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-85mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic - attracts with its low price per used lens option (about $ 150). For myself, I noted the internal fast focusing, slightly improved aperture and small lens sizes. In general, it's a good budget zoom.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
very informative and concise) not just letters on any Nikon glass
Reply
It is very good that we began to pay more attention to Canon optics!
Reply
it's sarcasm
Reply
Here you go.
On a decent resource and about indecent equipment ...
So you can go down to Samsung ...
Reply
Well, nikon already chewed and leaked. We are waiting for you to get good glasses for Arkady so that there is something to write
Reply
And why is he not decent?
Reply
Mikhalych overheated
Reply
Makhalych what are you photographing ?? Share high-quality equipment, by the way Samsung / Pentax have won the Grand Prix more than once, the Pentax K10 is still even a great camera among the cropped ones.
Reply
I have a Nikon d7100 and SB910
To the question “what” ...
Only for family.
Then the duty officer on the topic sold something.
I will ask directly: "Haven't received it in the face for a long time?"
Reply
Waiting for you, please warm my face, the address is Odessa B. Arnautskaya 100. Shout out loud, make a noise
Reply
I ask again, I am asking, ale ... why did the battle end?))
Reply
Another city and street do not forget to ask the person.
Reply
Well, I have such an indecent technique. I apologize to Arkady for asking him to test this glass.
If someone is very smart and uses only Zeiss, Fottlander and Schneider-Kreuznach, and he reads the reviews in the West, this is his personal difficulties, no one forces anyone. No one forces him to buy. It seems that some individuals instead of homework write comments here, already disgusting. Thanks for attention.
Reply
Aleksey, you are great, as well as other people who send their equipment to Arkady, no matter for which camera and manufacturer. And the fact that Makhalych has d7100 and SB910 still does not say anything, because he has a Nikon brain.
Reply
Many thanks to Arkady for his dedicated work. And everyone who is dissatisfied wants to say that the author maintains this resource for beginner photographers who often do not have the means to purchase expensive professional equipment, or who are just trying their hand at photography. And Arkady suggests in most cases that there is enough inexpensive obsolete equipment to understand the photograph is yours or not. Some people still drive cars 30 years ago and do not want modern ones, because the quality is higher there, and not everyone wants to live in a modern rhythm of life, where vanity takes half of free time and there is simply no time for a person to stop and look around to see that the world around is still beautiful and amazing. And the ancient manual technique makes you stop, look around, think, capture everyday life in a form in which most ordinary people do not see it.
Reply
Thanks to Arkady. I personally like his work. And the mikhalyches ... well, as they say, there are some mikhalyches in the family)))
Reply
It would be interesting to compare with the Canon EF 28-70mm f / 3.5-4.5 II in photo quality
Reply
Strange, in this review Arkady claims that he liked this lens more than the Canon EF 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 USM, but I liked the photo from the review just the second.
Reply
This is described in the section on my experience, and relates specifically to my impressions.
Reply
Is it possible to get rid of the trunk in any way? Well, really really enrage the beginning. And while I can’t find a replacement for glass, as a staffer
Reply
To put on an elastic band for money on a lens in a place between a focus ring and numbers of focal lengths.
Reply
It seems to me or is the photo really chubby? At one time, was 28-135 sold because it is soap, something else.
Reply
It does not seem. There really are no photos, and this is not a reproach to Arkady, I think he squeezed everything he could out of this copy.
Either the problem copy or the glass is just zero, worse than the 18-55 class whales, despite usm and internal focus.
Reply
I also think that the problem is in the instance. There is no quality. I took this lens up, also at 350D. I managed to click on the street several times. Link to one of the photos-https: //ibb.co/mmV4ic
Reply
Reply
I had and have this lens. On crop it is no, there is no sharpness and contrast at all. But it’s worth fastening it to the FF, you will immediately get a huge difference. My copy at first gave some BF, but after alignment in the service center (I pressed it on the Canon 5D, which has no focus adjustment in the menu), it literally changed. I consider this lens the best among budget zoom for Kenon. In addition, it is very light, focuses quickly, small, cheap, has 24mm at the wide end, is not very dark and is built soundly.
Reply
I liked him on Canon 10d. There are quite a few convincing photos. By contrast in sharpness - order.
Reply
I put on mark1n-crop2 on 1.3d and for the first time after pentax and sony decided to keep the canon / all pictures are better 24-120 4l \ 75-300 is also good, but 70-200 4l in sharpness removed sony 70-200 4l on sony 7r \\ on crop 1.6 only 70-2004l sings / I already asked a question in the 1D MARK2N review to Arkady / maybe 1d hit well or the difference in crop factors 1.3 and 1.6 or their own matrix on 1d mark2n \ on any canons of the amateur segment they sang only Elki and expensive Elki and not regular ones \\ now I'm happy, although the takumar is threaded with an adapter \ f1.4 50mm \ -so in sharpness, and on sony it's better \ here it is not at all clear.
Reply
Check out the 70-200 4.0L on the Internet. Look at the circuit. Pure fluorite). Better current boot 2.8 latest modifi stabilized. The quality of the four due to the incredible quality of the glasses present in its scheme is stuck on 5.6 not only by the adjacent zooms of allies but also by many competing fixes. The topic has been repeatedly discussed.
Reply
There is only one fluorite lens, in both versions.
Reply
A very good lens. It’s worth 7d. Who needs a sharp sharp take Karl or canon L
Reply
In fact, ALL the wide lower zooms from the boot of the film-based digital time range 90-beginning 00 are firewood and comparing them is a waste of time and effort. For everything else, there is L. Even at 4.0.
Reply
Hello everyone. And I am overwhelmingly grateful for the review. The other day I bought a 1D Mark2 body and am looking for a staff for travel, it was useful to read, I am inclined to this choice, unless of course I scrape together some L-class fix-hole.
Reply
1d for travel ... Well, that's it)
Reply
24-105 / 4L - it is still very popular with photographers.
Used a lot and is inexpensive. (Arkady has a review here on Radozhiv.)
There is an even older Canon Zoom Lens EF 28-105mm 1: 3.5-4.5 II USM, but I will not hang it on my Units, although they say that it seems to be quite good for the money. It is very inexpensive on the secondary housing. Was a whale at the Canon film cameras. (Arkady has a review here on Radozhiv.)
I would recommend saving some money for Lku. On the other hand, if you need a lens for travel, which is not a pity, then 28-105 will probably do, especially since the resolution of your camera is small.
Reply