canon 28-135 IS anygood? [Archive]

View Full Version : canon 28-135 IS anygood?

stephenb

05-04-2006, 10:46

I have just sold a canon 28-105 usm which was very soft at any thing other than f8-11. i want to replace the lens with something of similar range but the 24-105L is a bit out of range at the mo. does anybody have any experience good or bad with the 28-135 IS. I will be using it on a 20D.
Thanks

Glen

05-04-2006, 11:26

whats your budget?

stephenb

05-04-2006, 11:54

300-350 ish. i have been considering the sigma 24-70 f2.8 to complement my sigma70-200, but the image stabiliser thingy sounds pretty good.

fingerz

05-04-2006, 14:19

Here's a review of the Canon 28-135:
http://photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_28135_3556_is/index.htm

And here's a review of the 28-105 you just sold for comparison:
http://photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_28105_3545/index.htm

If you look at the resolution figures, you'll see that both lenses are pretty similar for sharpness, and seeing as that's the reason you gave for selling the 28-105 I'd be wary if I were you. It might be worth spending a couple of months saving your pennies and going for something a bit dearer.

ASH

05-04-2006, 16:43

Glen

05-04-2006, 22:19

wait and save up the other 200ish quid and go 'L' someone here got one from T4 cameras for £669

SDK^

06-04-2006, 17:58

I used to have a 28-135IS and it was very soft 28-44mm under F8. Sharpness improved a little past that but it was nothing amazing.

brimo

06-04-2006, 22:19

Ita a good reasonable price walkabout lens especially at F7-9
But if you can afford it, the new 24-105 F4 L is brilliant on a 20D my percentage of keepers has gone up by quite a large margin so it was definateley worth the extra money.:whistle2:

SeanBoyce

23-04-2006, 09:08

I have 28-135IS There is too much shake in it and I would not bye it again.Hopeful this year I can get my28-70F.2.8.to Complement 16-35. 70-200. & 100-400. I do hope you have alot of luck in whatever you bye. Good Shooting.

busterboy

23-04-2006, 09:35

I used to have a 28-135IS and it was very soft 28-44mm under F8. Sharpness improved a little past that but it was nothing amazing.

Same here, Really would not recommend this lens for an upgrade..:(

Save a little more and look a little further if its possible and look at the 24-105 F4L..:)

dave_bass5

26-04-2006, 13:03

Hi Guys, just joined and looking forward to some good banter
I have the 28-105 UMS MKII and had the 28-135 IS over the last weekend. i think the 28-105 was sharper. i didnt do any big tests but did shoot a few shots that i have also done with the 28-105. for the money i just didnt think it was worth it. mostly shooting my kids so IS wasnt a great help plus i found that the lens was slow. if i was given it or didnt have the 28-105 then i would keep it but for me (and the kids) a faster lens was needed.
I have now got a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8EX and its so much better (but also bigger and heavier). seems sharp enough at f/2.8 at both ends (and if not ill sharpen it up in PSCS2)

26-04-2006, 13:22

Hi Dave and welcome. You can't beat faster apertures. :welcome:

I deleted your duplicate post. :)

SammyC

27-04-2006, 08:00

I think its fair to say that both the 105 and the 135 are similar in abilities. It'll be down to particular lenses which is sharper on the day. Obviously the 135 has the IS which accounts for the price but I would say that neither will compete with a proper lens.
:)

shiato storm

27-04-2006, 13:40

i use the 28-135 and also have the 24-70. I may have been lucky in the copy I have received but I can't fault it for the money - its second hand yet utterly mint in all respects. ok, so when it comes down to it the L lens takes the other apart, thats the premium quality you'd expect for the price, and especially the wide open constant apperture. that said I use the 28-135 on my 1DII and in comparison to the images from a 20D the results do look somewhat sharper, coupled with the IS its a very usable walk around lens, particularly when you consider the field of view is greater with a 1.3x rather than a 1.6x crop. I have not tried the 24-105 L yet but in low light situations the 2.8 is fantastic and no matter how much IS you've got its hard to beat...
so, final verdict on the 28-135 IS? decent all round lens (and cheaper alternative to the 24-105, if you have the 24-70 too!) but perhaps not ideal for the 1.6x crops where you don't really gain much at the wide end but do get a little bit at the long end... make of it what you will.

dave_bass5

29-04-2006, 10:06

Hi Dave and welcome. You can't beat faster apertures. :welcome:

I deleted your duplicate post. :)

Hi and thanks.

I have been really happy with my 24-70 EX and it seems sharp all the way out to 70mm but its just too heavy to carry around so i took it back and got a Tamron 28-75mm. much nicer even though i lost the 6mm at the wide end.
I would say both the f/2.8 lens's were sharper than both my Canon's but my 28-105 was sharper then the 28-135IS at most zoom lengths.