Dear all...I finally came to the decision of buying EOS 300 as my first SLR but I am totally restricted by the price of an EF canon zoom lens...but as a compromise, I thought that sigma offers a comparable quality lens as 28-105 or 28-135. Do u think it is worth it the extra money for a canon lens? and the other thing...is the 28-135 more suitable than the 28-105 for my general needs? I can see that the main advantage is tha macro facility. Thanks for ur opinions in advance.

-- H Jammal (h.jammal@doctors.net.uk), March 24, 2002

Answers

H If I were in your position I would definitely go for the Canon EOS 28- 105 zoom. I use the 28-135 IS zoom and it is a great lens but so is the 28-105 which is smaller and lighter. BH in NYC sells the 28-105 import for $214.95. Sigma and Tamron make okay lenses but a Canon lens on a Canon body just makes good sense in terms of fit and finish and USM fast focus. Many pros use this lens and swear by it. Alternatively you might consider buying the fine 50mm 1.8 lens for $80 and learn to zoom with your feet and probably learn a lot more about photography than with the zoom. Plus at 1.8 it is much brighter, lighter and probably sharper and more contrasty than the zoom. I'm glad I never owned a zoom until I learned composition with the 50mm lens. Good luck.

-- Don (wgpinc@yahoo.com), March 24, 2002.