Good quality of item

Kitchen remodel changing the fixtures, the flooring, and possibly even the design and structure of the walls.

very cheap for something like this. You won't get the photo with your fast, monster Canon telephoto if it's too much of a pain to take with you, and you won't work unobtrusively wielding something that looks like a ballistic missle. Everything's a compromise. | B4 Door

Nothing to complain about.

Reasonably sharp, light and inexpensive. Perfect if your budget is tight. | Concrete Masonry

Cheap build matches its cheap price

It takes pictures

Barely

It's worth $20 bucks

Zoom Quick. Take clear picture

Just because it is old and cheap

I use it and I like it. It is cheap but good for beginner. Don't waste money for expensive lense before you practicing.

Reasonbly sharp
Light
Inexpensive

Cheap build matches it's cheap price

I agree with the other reviewers that this lens is built cheap-but it is cheap so what's the complaint?
I've used the lens on my Pentax K10d & while it doesn't produce saturated colors, it is pretty sharp. This lens is ok for a beginner & has some uses for a more experienced photographer.

Light comes through it.

As sharp as a hot dog. Zoom ring would probably turn smoother if you dipped it in sand for lubrication. Lens is about as quick as jello left out overnight in Anchorage in February. Someone with ADD can focus quicker and longer. Hunts more than Ted Nugent. Slightly quieter than the crowd outside of a Larry the Cable Guy show.

Junk. This lens is junk. Sure, it's got a great range, it's light, and small. However, a 3 year old with tracing paper can produce a better quality image.

Similar Products Used:

Canon 70-200 F4 L (Ha, right.) Sigma 28-125.

Its compact, light and only $100.

Its compact, light and only $100...you are getting what you paid for. The AF is relativly slow and noisy compared to high end lenses. The zoom ring offers more resistance than what I am used to. The mount(Canon) is silver painted plastic. This is a little misleading and thought it deserved to be catergorized as a weakness.

This lens is stricktly for the low budgeted types who must have a zoom-lens. Don't expect hard core construction...you only paid a $100. If you want semi-sharp photos, grap a tripod. Otherwise, you get soft but fairly descent action shots in the 100-200 range. The 300mm range should only be used if you have the steadiest of hands and are taking stationary subject shots. You must have experience working with your camera's manual settings to get the good clean shots. Don't think just using the auto feature on you camera body is going to work 100% of the time. Plan on tooling around and learning how to use the pair together. I purchased mine for a week down at the beach. I figured if sand and/or water attack, I would only be out $100.

Customer Service

Not applicable.

Similar Products Used:

Promater Spectrum7 70-210

Inexpensive.

Poorly constructed. Plastic mount. Inability to get simple parts from Wolf.

Well ... I guess you get what you pay for. I've had this lens for 2 years now and I must say that I'm not very happy with it. First ... the focus ring has too much play in it. After autofocusing, you can actually move the ring a few centimeters left and right so I have to take care that I keep focus. The major issue I have with this lens is the mount. IT'S PLASTIC. AND ... not only that, after 2 years, all of the pins that hold it to the camera have broken off. Contacting Wolf ... they won't send you a new mount to fix it yourself, which seems fairly easy to do, but you must send it in to them to have it done. Another money making scheme on their part.

Similar Products Used:

Quantary 28-90

Wonderfully light and unobtrusive. AF works well on my EOS. Fair-good performance in the central area of the frame up to about 200mm. Very handy and portable. Very, very cheap for something like this. You won't get the photo with your fast, monster Canon telephoto if it's too much of a pain to take with you, and you won't work unobtrusively wielding something that looks like a ballistic missle. Everything's a compromise.

Cheap plastic construction; parts seem somewhat ill-fitting. *Bad* corner performance at the wider apertures. 4.5-6.7 is slow.

I've found that in photography, you *don't* always get what you pay for. I've used Leica,Contax, Rollei, etc., and the astronomical prices for some of the items do not always return value in terms of results. Sometimes, the cheapest things - while not as good as their expensive counterparts - deliver what you need and can even surprise.

Similar Products Used:

Not many zooms. All kinds of quality primes.