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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 30, 2005, 12:03 PM   #11
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

stonehill wrote:
Quote:
However I took a lot of pics inside the camera shop w/0 flash so many came out blurry-still hard to know what to do...

Any last thoughts ?
Yeap - That's IS @ work

Turn on the flash and this will freeze the blurring from the camera shakes you're seeing... or increase the camera's ISO so a faster shutter speed can be used.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 1, 2005, 11:06 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
wsandman1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 318
Default

I recently brought the Sigma 18 - 200 DC lense as a walk around lense. If the photos taken the 18 - 125are similar to it. You shouldget somepretty decent shots. I recently broughtthe Canon 28 - 135 IS because I do a lot ofindoor work where flash isn't allowed.I realize that none of the lenses we're discussing will stand up to EX or L quality lenses at the extremewide angle or telephoto ranges. ButI find that the 18 - 200 is the most convenient lense I have, almost like having a point and shoot long range zoom digicam. The biggest compliant I have about the 28 - 135 IS is that you need toswitch to a 17 mm wide angle lense for group shots.
wsandman1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2005, 6:36 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
mrcoons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 119
Default

I have the Sigma 18-125 and the Canon 28-105 and see virtually no difference in the shots I've taken. The Sigma is on my camera most often because of the wider range. I cannot imagine why I would need IS on a 135mm shot so getting the Canon 28-135 IS seems like a waste of money, to me that is. Just my opinion.
mrcoons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2005, 1:23 PM   #14
Member
 
eosthree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 48
Default

Although I have never been a huge proponent of IS(all but one of my lenses don't have it), I just purchased my first lens with it(28-135)and find it useful for handholding in difficult lighting. I would hardly call it a waste of money. Generally it's accepted you can gain 2 stops with IS, this can be huge with a slower lens like the 28-135, just a few clouds and you are bumping the 1/focal length shutter speeds with this lens.
eosthree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2005, 5:10 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
mrcoons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 119
Default

Good point about the low light. I don't do much low light work so it never occured to me. I have IS on my 75-300mm and love it as I get handheld shots I couldn't with out it. As I said it was just my opinion from my narrow perspective.With an opinion on any lens it's all in what you are going to use it for.
mrcoons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2005, 10:56 PM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5
Default

I just sold my Sigma 18-125mm after a trip to the camera store.Both copies of the Canon 28-105 f3.5/4.5 were markedly sharper.The focusing ability of the Canon lenses left no doubt.I got a mint 28-105 f3.5 off eBay for $170.I've had it long enough to compare pics from it to the large # of pics from the 18-125.The Canon is just better.I was surprised.I miss the range a little on the wide end,but don't take many 18-28mm shots(kit lens gets those).The ring USM motor in the Canon is so nice.
aVolanche is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2005, 12:24 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Walter C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA USA
Posts: 7,757
Default

The Canon 28-135 IS is a great lens. I keep in on my 20D most of the time. It's worth every penny since you get a lot more "keepers".

Keep in mind the resale value, too. You'll recover a lot more of your original investment if you ever choose to sell it -- which is unlikely.
Walter C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2005, 10:44 AM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 65
Default

Thanks everyone!

I ended up w/the canon 28-105 3.5-4.5. I've taken over 300 pics so far and reallly like it. I have the 50mm 1.8 for low light stuff and the kit for wide end. For me the $ and the weight made the difference over the 28-135. However my brother in law loves his 28-135 but he's a big guy and likes heaver lenses.
stonehill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2005, 11:52 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
mrcoons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 119
Default

I have this lens as well and love it for outside photos or inside with plenty of light. I loaned it to my wife to use while she is on vacation. Enjoy it!
mrcoons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2005, 12:35 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 155
Default

mrcoons wrote:
Quote:
I have this lens as well and love it for outside photos or inside with plenty of light. I loaned it to my wife to use while she is on vacation.
And what do you do while you wife is on vacation--while the cat's away, as it were. (LOL)

I just have to get in my pitch for IS. I am a believer--big time--in IS. Remember, that you have to adjust the 1/focal length calculation for the crop factor on a 10D/20D/300D/350D, so 135mm requires 1/216th shutter under the old rule of thumb. Add a couple cups of coffee and a gin & tonic, and I need 1/focal length X 4! The IS lenses I use now all work wonders for me: 17-85 which is the one that I use most w/o a tripod; 28-135--except for lacking the wide end, this is a wonderful lens and my standard portrait lens; 100-400--this one has the dual mode IS with mode 2 being vertical stabilization only so it is good for panning motorcycle races, car races, flying birds, running purse snatchers; and finally the 500mmF4. With the 2xII extender, this lens with its huge shade on a tripod with gimbal mount still magnifies the least breeze until you half press the shutter and it suddenly becomes still.

After all that, if you can't afford it you can't afford it. If I wanted a budget carry around, though, the Sigma and Tamron 18-200mm lenses have had some surprisingly good reviews. Check the latest Popular Photgraphy to see how well the Sigma 18-200 stacks up against the Canon 28-300 L (the full frame counterpart to 18-200).
wburychka 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 9:55 PM.