28-135 IS or 70-200mm f/4.0 L

[dennykyser]

There is not a huge price diff, so am considering this lens. I believe it is about $125 more and I read this on another post.
What do you want to do with it? Generally, it's a wonderful lens. Nice sharpness, contrast and colors. The IS features works well. Keep in mind, it's not a bright lens. If this could be a problem with shooting moving subjects in dim light. Also, most DSLR's have a effective focal length "multiplier" of 1.3-1.6, so you won't get wide angle from this lens.

If I loose some of the wide angle, and I have a 50mm and a 100 mm this may be a better choice. what do you think.

[Belmondo]

I think we tend sometimes to get hung up on L optics. They are superior, but there is a tradeoff in the two lenses you're comparing. The 28-135 is probably a more versatile range for the average shooter, and the added plus of IS makes it a strong performer.

I would say you really need to ask yourself if you're going to need the extra length between 135 and 200 all that often. If so, then maybe you are better off with the longer lens. If not, though, then you won't hurt yourself by picking the 28-135 IS.

IMHO, it's the best bargain in the Canon line for a good quality medium zoom.

Either way, you're probably okay.

Tom

[Vegas Poboy]

I agree with Belmondo, decide on what's more important to you and go from there. Both lense are great you have to decide on what zoom is more important to you.

[MrKnowNothing]

I have both lenses and find I use the 28-135 A LOT more. While the 70-200 is a very nice lens it is to big and heavy for every day shooting especially of kids indoors and family shots.

[Morden]

While the 70-200 is a very nice lens it is to big and heavy for every day shooting especially of kids indoors and family shots.
Indeed; also, the 70 "wide" end isn't nearly wide enough for general use, especially considering the 1.6 "cropping factor".

The 28-135 is a very versatile lens, as mentioned repeatedly in another current thread in this very forum. :)

[Phil Hall]

I have both lenses but use the 28-135 much more for everyday use. The 70-200 is good for wildlife, especially with a tele converter (which does not work on the 28-135). I think the 28-135 will get a lot more use, you could always get a 100-400 later.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I think you need both!

[Morden]

I think you need both!
Clearly it would be nice to have both (I have the 28-135 and the 70-200 f2.8, as well as the 16-35 f2.8) but if one one or the other can be afforded at once, then I would opt for the more versatile 28-135.