Highly portable lens with high optical performance and light weight of 340 g. A very practical ultra-wide-angle zoom. The large front lens group minimizes periperal darkening, and the flare-blocking diaphragm minimizes flare. Also, with lens group 2 being the zoom group, distortion is corrected.
Canon EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Ultra Wide Angle Zo, Sunday, 29 July 2007
Overall rating (weighted)
3.8
Sharpness
3.0
Build Quality
3.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
5.0
I have been quite happy with this lens. I have never had an USM lens before and was pleasantly surprised at how quiet it is. I have been quite pleased with the pictures it takes, even in low lighting. Great lens for the price.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
Fine performance for the price, Wednesday, 25 April 2007
Overall rating (weighted)
4.3
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
4.0
The main problem with this lens is the speed, or the lack thereof. Compared to the EF 20/2.8, it's only a half stop slower but compared to the EF 35/2, it's one and a half stops slower. While this is not a big deal if you're shooting outside, you have a problem in low light environments. Secondarily, if you're shooting a small sensor DSLR, you're not getting the wide angle benefits of this lens.
For film or for full-frame 35mm sized sensor DSLR users, this is a good choice if you can live with the primary limitation of the slow speed. Optically, it's not bad at all. It has more distortion than an architectural photographer will want but if you're mainly shooting architecture you probably wouldn't be attracted to this lens anyway. As a reportage lens or a travel lens, it will serve well. Although it's relatively large--especially with the dinner plate sized lens hood in place--it's a lightweight. Build quality is industry-standard consumer grade for Canon. Which means it's actually very well put together from mostly plastic components. The lens mount is metal and the lens elements are, of course, glass. Autofocus is fast and the motor is a Canon Ultrasonic so you get the benefit of manual focus without having to flip switches to turn off the autofocus.
I've used this lens off and on for about eight years. I originally shot color nature and landscapes and this was a very useful lens for such purposes. I mostly used a tripod so having a slow lens wasn't a limitation. For the last few years, I have been doing only black and white film work with an emphasis on the artful aspects of photography. When I use 35mm, I've trimmed my most used lenses to mostly primes so this lens doesn't get selected as often as it once was. Still, when the light is bright, I sometimes use this lens for the convenience. It's very versatile with good performance. If used at medium apertures under the same lighting conditions, I seriously doubt anyone would be able to see any practical difference in photos made with this lens compared to one of the much more expensive L-series Canon zooms. For the price, it's very good value.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
Great Lens, Thursday, 05 April 2007
Overall rating (weighted)
4.5
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
4.0
I love it. Im no pro but the wide angle is great for family pictures, weddings ect.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
Affordable wide angle, Wednesday, 21 March 2007
Overall rating (weighted)
5.0
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
This lens is good for those who are looking to get decent wide angle but don't have the budget for the EF 17-40 f/4L. In order to beat the quality of this lens you need to spend almost double.
I used the 20-35 on my Rebel XT which makes it equivalent to 32 to 56mm. It's not as wide as the EF-S 18-55 that came with the camera but the quality is much better. The ring type USM focuses fast and quietly. Overall, a great value for the price.
If you can afford it, I would step up to the 17-40 f/4L which gives you a little more range. If not, this is a decent alternative.
Another option to consider is the EF 20mm f/2.8. It's slightly faster but costs about $100 more.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
Good lens but is it really worth $390?, Sunday, 31 July 2005
Overall rating (weighted)
3.5
Sharpness
3.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
3.0
Value for Money
4.0
I use this lens at work every day, and in general it's a very good lens. The optics are sharp, and the focus, athough not fast, is not something to complain about.
The only problem I have is that for $400 for a 20-35mm lens that's f/3.5 is a little pricey in my view. It's also not the sharpest lesn on the market, and when you can spend a another $200 for some 17-85mm IS I find it hard to justify buying this lens for the asking price.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
Great for travel, Saturday, 19 July 2003
Overall rating (weighted)
4.8
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
5.0
This is a wonderful lens. It is especially nice for travel photos in cities, indoors, and for some landscapes. You also need to get a hood because of the wide Angle of view. In addition, you need a filter to protect the lens as well as function as a filter -haze or polarizer. The filter must be a special wide angle filter (thin metal ring) and you won't be able to attach the lens cap over the filter. Small price to pay, however.
