Choose between 2 lenses ?

[Pati Applewhite]

I have to choose between these two lenses for my 10D


Canon EF 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 II USM

and the

Canon EF 28-135mm 3.5-5.6 IS USM Image Stabilizer Lens

I want an everyday lens that I can use for all around use.

I just am not sure which would be the best choice. Any help would be appreciated.

I already have the 70-200L IS, the 50mm 1.8 and the 24-70L IS

[jd_D60]

Both lenses are targetted at the same audience, if you do have the choice the 28-135 IS is a great lens (I've had both).

The IS will help in low light and the extra 30mm is useful.

These are not L glass but the quality I've experienced is pretty darn good.

john

[Pati Applewhite]

Thanks John, lightness (lens weight) is a big plus for me but the IS may be more important. Right now I am "L" glass POOR! and the 28-135 is looking pretty good.

Pati

[daveh]

If I were in that situation, rather than getting yet another overlapping (somewhat reduced performance) zoom, I would save up for something like an 85mm f1.2.

(Of course, I'm saying that as someone who has yet to find a "keeper" zoom but that's what happens when you ask strangers for lens opinions ;))

[Morden]

I like the 28-135; it stays on my 10D for most of the time, despite it being my only "non L" lens.

The 28-135 has a good 'zoom range', it has IS, and it is not very heavy.

[hommedars]

Pati Applewhite wrote:
I have to choose between these two lenses for my 10D


Canon EF 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 II USM

and the

Canon EF 28-135mm 3.5-5.6 IS USM Image Stabilizer Lens

I want an everyday lens that I can use for all around use.

I just am not sure which would be the best choice. Any help would be appreciated.

I already have the 70-200L IS, the 50mm 1.8 and the 24-70L IS

Why do you say you "have to choose" and what is your motivation for a new lens. It appears to me that you already have a very nice selection of glass that encompasses the entire focal range in question. Just curious.

I have always been disappointed when I go out with just one body/lens. You will inevitably end up needing the lens that is in the bag, or wish you had the L lens.

Just my 2 cents.

Joe

[NILOLIGIST]

Pati Applewhite,

I would suggest you go with the 28-135USM, it is a decent lens and it covers a wide focal range. This will allow you time to decide which L-glass you want and need. You can get a pretty good idea from using the 28-135, what you can't shoot and would like too and what you don't want to be able to shoot.

I know I am going for the 100-400L, and the 180 Macro but I am still undecided about the wide angle, I am having trouble with that one. Leaning towards the 24-70 but I also like the 17-40.

It can be a hard decision, just take the time out to determine what you want to shoot. The one thing I know is that I am NOT WILLING to COMPROMISE on L-glass, I want the best results and I will use the best glass possible. I am willing to make the sacrifices needed to get the best. I did not spend $1500 on a body to put cheap glass on it.

Good luck and have fun!

NiL,

[Greg M]

It's not even close. Get the 28-135 IS.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Yeah,. of the two the 28-135 IS is the no brainer :)

[msvirick]

When I ordered 10d, I had the same problem.
My sales man is my patient too, and I trust him, as he does me with his children.
He said go for 28-135.
It was more expensive (Cdn 899) but then nothing good is cheap. It could be worst with a L lens

[Fred Bopp]

Save your money for a worthwhile investment like a second body (10D or the hinted D3) as you now have top glass so why go backwards? My 24-70 lives on my 1D or 10D whichever I'll be using the most that day. I gave my son a D60 with my 28-135 IS and he is quite happy with that combination. He has not had a chance to see the better performance from "L" glass but you and I have.
You have the best, so just use it! Ignore the extra weight of the 24-70. Think of it as a means of steadying your camera.
Today I used the 100-400 IS from my boat crossing Vineyard Sound at 27 knots (about 31 mph) and the photos are just amazing for a hand held lens bouncing around and still producing sharp results.
Regards, Fred

[Greg M]

Fred Bopp wrote:
Save your money for a worthwhile investment like a second body (10D or the hinted D3) as you now have top glass so why go backwards?
A second body over another piece of glass???

Fred Bopp wrote:
My 24-70 lives on my 1D or 10D whichever I'll be using the most that day. I gave my son a D60 with my 28-135 IS and he is quite happy with that combination. He has not had a chance to see the better performance from "L" glass but you and I have.
I have owned these L lenses 16-35L, 24-70L, 28-70L, 70-200L f4, 70-200L IS, and the 100-400L IS. I had the 28-135 IS before any of these and I still have it. I have used the 28-135 IS more then any L lens. It is Canon's absolute best all around all purpose lens for a walk around lens. Canon designed this lens with just the right trade offs and they hit a homerun with it!

Fred Bopp wrote:
You have the best, so just use it! Ignore the extra weight of the 24-70. Think of it as a means of steadying your camera.
I can handhold a 1D with a 70-200L IS and a 550EX for 3-4 hours with no problem. Weight is not an issue for me. The issue for me is the lack of range that the 24-70L has. I would (and do) much prefer the 28-135 IS over the 24/28-70L. The slight picture quality advantage is not worth giving up the range AFAIAC. I use a flash when needed and when I can't use a flash then I'll pick-up the faster lens.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that the 28-135 IS is a better quality lens. It is not but everything has it's trade offs and I prefer the trade offs that come with the 28-135 IS. I love the range. I wish that Canon had produced the 24-105L IS that they were testing. That would have been a sweet lens. Big and heavy but sweet.

Fred Bopp wrote:
Today I used the 100-400 IS from my boat crossing Vineyard Sound at 27 knots (about 31 mph) and the photos are just amazing for a hand held lens bouncing around and still producing sharp results.
Regards, Fred
You're not kidding. That lens is simply awesome. The only reason I sold it was because I never used it after I got the 70-200L IS. Both of those lenses are worth every penny that you spend on them, if you use them.