Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 6, 2005, 3:58 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Fragger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17
Default

I've been reading a lot about this lens and spoke to a few friends about it. I was told it's an almost L quality lens with Image Stabilizer and Ultrasonic silent motor for just around $400.00 USD. Any opinions, suggestions, warnings and/or experiences would be greatly appreciated as I know very little about lens at this point.

Thanks in advance,

Fragger

EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM









Fragger is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 6, 2005, 4:37 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

I have used this lens as my walk around lens and I thought it was very good.
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2005, 4:51 PM   #3
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Fragger

I have this lens too - It's sharp OK, but it's no 'L' quality!

It wiggles like crazy, and tend to be very loose after many use and will droop under its own weight... (ie no zoom lock). It's a USM quiet, but then you can hear the 'IS' kicking in
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2005, 5:19 PM   #4
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

I have used this as my walk-around for the past year and still like it very much - it covers a very critical range for me. The one other suggestion I would make is the 17-85. It also has IS and is really intended to be the DSLR version of the 28-135 for film. The one issue that keeps the 17-85 from being a definite recommendation is the cost - about $600. Maybe if it was a faster lense but I still have a tough time justifiying the extra $200. I would say if you don't have anything to cover the wide end and can afford it go with the 17-85. If you already have the 17-28 covered and don't require that range in your walk-around go with the 28-135. Just my .02
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2005, 5:30 PM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

I agree with JohnG

1. This lens also works on my EOS-3 which the EF-S 17-85 won't
2. For the price difference I got an excellent (and fast) Sigma 17-35 f/2.8-4 EX HSM
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 6, 2005, 5:52 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

Another option is the tamron 28-75 XR DI with is F2.8 throughout the zoom range.

Sells for about $320 after rebates.

Awesome zoom range for portrait and vacation stuff, nice build quality and reasonably light!

--- Terry
terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 7, 2005, 5:47 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Paul(UK)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 290
Default

Fragger wrote:
Quote:
I've been reading a lot about this lens and spoke to a few friends about it. I was told it's an almost L quality lens with Image Stabilizer and Ultrasonic silent motor for just around $400.00 USD. Any opinions, suggestions, warnings and/or experiences would be greatly appreciated as I know very little about lens at this point.

Thanks in advance,

Fragger

EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

I love this lens. The sharpness surprises me at times. CA has never been a problem. I've not gone looking for it, but if it's not obvious then why look for it.

IS is good, but mine has been playing up recently. It comes on then I can feel a buzz and the image is moving. Sometimes it will do it two or three times in a row.

I bought mine because I heard good things about it and I've never been disappointed.
Paul(UK) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 7, 2005, 8:02 AM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19
Default

An excellent walk-around lens. It has good range, great optic quality and the IS feature is very helpful. As good as this lens is, it doesn't come up to par with an L lens, but I have only compared it with the 70-200 4.0L which is super great. For the money, you can't go wrong with the 28-135 IS lens.
harryp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 7, 2005, 1:34 PM   #9
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

its a great walkabout lens.. mine is attached to my 20d 90 percent of the time.. while it sacrifices a bit at the wide, its nice to have that tele range at times... i totally agree with NHL, skip the 17-85 and use the saved money for an nice wide angle such as the mentioned sigma 17-35 2.8..
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 8, 2005, 3:40 AM   #10
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Think carefully about what you want from a walkaround lens.

I would suggest:
1. A focal length range that will suit the highest possible percentage of the kind of photographs you like to take.
2. The best optical quality you can afford that covers the focal length you want.
3. A fast aperture (preferably) or IS if you can't get the fast aperture.

You then have a range of choices, if you're willing to zoom with your feet or have purist tendencies you could choose a prime in the 20-35mm range.

Otherwise you need to think seriously about focal length. For a walkaround lens on an SLR most people want at least the FOV equivalent of a 28-100mm lens on 35mm camera. The 17-85mm was specifically designed to cover the same range on a smaller sensor as the 28-135mm did on a 35mm camera. For people who used to use a 50-200mm as their walkaround on 35mm camera, the 28-135 seems ideal.

I would suggest that the 28-135mm (*1.6=45-216mm) is for most people simply not wide enough at the wide end. You can certainly save money and buy yourself an extra lens to cover the wide-angle range, but then you have lost the convenience of not having to change lenses. But do note that this can be a very personal thing NHL for example pretty much uses the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 as his walkaround lens. It suits him, though he's mildly eccentric in this regard :blah:, but he gets some lovely photographs and makes him happy - which is exactly what you should be looking for.

My personal preference on a walkaround is that it be able to cover the wideangle and give reasonable portraits, I'm not bothered about focal length beyond 85mm or so, because I'm happy to change lenses when I want a longer focal length.

It all comes down to what focal length range you want to cover in a walkaround, because frankly most of the lenses you will be looking at for a walkaround will be of good - excellent quality. It's not that easy to find a real dog of a lens nowadays.

P.S. I wouldn't pay too much attention to which part of the demand curve for a particular lens other people happen to be on. i.e. whether they think that the features of that lens are worth its market price. Look at the features as objectively as you can and then decide what part of the demand curve YOU are on, is it worth the price to you?! Some people become quite heated about this and assert quite vehemently that lens X is not worth the money. I always like to decide on the features I want first and then decide if I can afford it. If I can't then I have to compromise, but if I can then I just don't worry about whether it's good value-for-money.

Relevant features of a lens include:
Manufacturer; build quality; size; weight; weather sealing; how nice it looks; image quality - resolution, contrast, chromatic aberration, vignetting, distortion, focal length(s), etc; whether people will go OOOH or HMPH when the see it on your camera; manufacturers warrantee; whether it's available in your favourite store; etc. Now it may be possible to get a fairly objective view of how a lens performs on some of those issues, however only YOU can decide on the relative importance of those characteristics to you. Much of the debate about lenses on internet forums is due to people assigning different relative weights to these different characteristics; so read the threads keeping that in mind.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:19 AM.