I currently have the following lenses in my camera bag: 20mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8 mkI, Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro and 70-200mm f2.8L. I am thinking that I should fill the gap between 20 and 50...I am considering the 28 f2.8 or 35 f2. Any advice or shared experiences would be greatly appreciated.

-- Roger Shrader (rashrader@hotmail.com), January 23, 2002

Answers

i would suggest the 28 because it is more in between 20 and 50. 35 is not a big jump from 50 IMHO. tell me, is that tamron 90 f/2.8 macro any good?

-- Jeff Nakayama (moonduck22@hotmail.com), January 23, 2002.

The Tamron Macro is an excellent lens. Sharpness, sharpness, sharpness, excellent color, contrast...Very nice, large and smooth MF ring, AF limiter switch.

Only downside is the very loud and clumsy autofocus, but in doing Macro work, I AF very, very little. I think you will be hard pressed, from everything I have read, to find anyone who does not like the results of this lens.

If you are going to use it for portrait work, you will either have to shoot it wide open, which will still be too sharp, or get a soft filter.

-- Roger S. (rashrader@hotmail.com), January 23, 2002.

Compromise. Go for the 28mm f/1.8 and get the focal length of the 28mm f/2.8 and the speed of the 35mm f/2. I have no idea how it compares optically to the 28/2.8 but it sounds like the answer to me.

-- Lee (Leemarthakiri@sport.rr.com), January 23, 2002.