Canon 28-135 USM IS Lens

[rdefrei1]

Hello, My name is Roger and I just bought a used Canon D10 from a friend but it has a Vivitar series 1 100-400/4.5-6.7 lens.

So I'm browsing to buy a wider lens for it some that I can use it indoor and outdoor.
I already read a lot of posts from the forum but I'm not convinced on which model should I get. As I don't want to make any mistake on my purchase I decide to get some help from you guys.

I was looking for the 3rd party lens first but I'm not sure if worth the risk.

Now I'm deciding between Canon 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens and Canon EF 28-105 3.5-4.5 USM Lens.

Question? Is a 3rd party lens with f/2.8 better than the above ones?
I'm looking to spend about $400.00 on a lens so which one is better on this price range?
Does it worth to get a IS lens ?


Thanks in advance.

[Headcase650]

For less money the tamron 28-75 2.8 blows away the 28-135. I owne both lenses and If I would have bought the tamron first I could have saved the money from the 28-135 and put it tward a 70-200 2.8.

[kb244]

but is the 28-75 Image stabalized?

[rdefrei1]

Do I really need a IS on the lens?
About this Tamron 28-75 2.8 Where is a good place to buy one?

[rdefrei1]

Could you give me the Tamron Model as I don't want to buy a wrong one?
Thanks.

[WestFalcon]

I beg to differ on the Tamron vs the Canon....If you shoot f8 or samller, the 28-135 is a sharp lens. I could show you a 16x20 that looks like a medium format print. This Canon lens gets blasted regularly but it is one of my favorites and I have 5 L lenses. The Tamron has a limited zoom range and no IS. I would only choose the Tamron if I shot wide open all the time.

[Radtech1]

For less money the tamron 28-75 2.8 blows away the 28-135.
The problem is that the Tamron completely chokes in the 75 to 135mm range.


Do I really need a IS on the lens?

That is up to you. With my 28-135 IS, I can handhold all day long at 1/30th sec, hit 1 out of 3 at 1/10th sec (god bless burst mode!), and if I can rest against something I have hand held it for 0.7 seconds.

I owne both lenses and If I would have bought the tamron first I could have saved the money from the 28-135 and put it tward a 70-200 2.8.

It does not quite have the contrast as L glass, but is why they invented Photoshop. I did find it to be every bit as sharp as the 70-200 2.8, with the added benifit of not frightening women, animals and small children.

All in all, best "walk around" lens that you can get.

Rad

[mdr]

The Tamron's autofocus is also very noisy and slow compared to the Canon's USM.

[slejhamer]

The problem is that the Tamron completely chokes in the 75 to 135mm range.


LOL! :D

But you have to admit it's much sharper at f/2.8 at all comparable focal lengths! ;)

[Longwatcher]

Let it be known I don't have THAT Tamron lens, although that seems to be one of their better ones, but except for "L" glass the 28-135 is the overall best value you will find in a zoom lens for your money in Canon glass. The 28-135 will give you a great range of options and except for the DoF advantage with a f2.8, the IS will more then make up for the wider aperture in lower light. Plus as mentioned you gain the 76-135 range.

You decision should rest on the following:
Quality at wider angles goes to that Tamron from what I have read.
flexability and range goes to the 28-135.
Lower light is a toss up, although I personally lean to the 28-135.
DoF goes to the Tamron.

If you think you will be shooting a lot indoors then the Tamron will probably be the better of the two. If you will be shooting in a variety of situations then the 28-135 IS will be the better of the two.

And you will note nobody realy mentioned the 28-105. The 28-135 IS is a much better lens for your money then that one.

Just my opinion, feel free to ignore.

[rdefrei1]

Thanks for your help. I will try to buy it today.
Let you know later.

[J Rabin]

rdefrei:
I owned the 28-135 IS USM and sold it. It's a nice, "if you only own 1 lens" kit all 'rounder. It has a very useful 10D zoom range for travel/outdoor pictures since the lens came from 35mm format. I frequently found myself using it in the 70-135mm range outdoor. At 80-110mm portraits, IF you are far enough away from subject, you can get some isolation from background at f/5.6. The optional hood does reduce flare and improve metering and contrast of images. My copy happened to be sharp and yielded many good images (there is variation).

Reasons why I sold it? 1) It was too slow for indoor available light photography. 2) The 10D is a fine camera, but moderate low light autofocus. This lens frequently "hunts" for focus in low light because it's f3.5-f/5.6. 2) I found IS marginal in utility at short focal lengths, especially since you can raise the ISO on the 10D and shoot at correct shutter speed relative to focal length without IS. 3) I never liked the "sloppy" way the zoom part of the lens moves in its housing and the lens "creep" when walking. 4) It focused too slow for action photography, indoors or out, flash or not. 5) On the long end, when you "NEED" 135mm, you frequently need more.

So, if you can only have just ONE lens for general photog, and none of the issues above relate to your dominant photography use, it's nice. If you frequently "can't move in close" candidly, it's nice. If you're set on it, buy a used copy on one of the forums for under $300, with hood.

If you can and do "move" in close, the Tamron 28-75mm di lens is sharper. Because it's f/2.8, it focuses better in low light (I've tried it) and isolates background on portraits. It comes with a hood instead of $25 option. It's a nice portrait lens.
If you don't move in close, and mostly do well lit or indoor events with flash, and want a keeper that you will not have to "trade up" again from dissatisfaction, save $ for the Canon 70-200L f/4.
In fact, there are two really good "all 'round travel TWO lens only" kit options for the 10D:
1) the Canon 17-40L f/4 and Canon 70-200L f/4. This gives you wide angle landscapes and good close-in indoor events. 70mm is a nice portrait length. The missing range is no biggie. Gives wide angle.
2) the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 di and the Canon 70-200L f/4. Advantage is that both share the uncommon 67mm filter size, saving over $100 in not duplicating circular polarizers and other filters, and light weight. The weakness is no wide angle landscapes or distorted proportions. Depends on your future needs.

J

[rdefrei1]

Yesterday I went to Ritz Camera to buy the lense but they didn't have one in stock to show me and I decided to look for a better price on the internet as they gave me a very high price for the lenses anyway.

I found some good prices at www.ExpressCameras.com

$389.00 for the Canon 28-135 f/3.505.6 IS
and
$339.00 plus $40 Rebate = $299.00 at www.BuyDig.com

Does anyone knows if BuyDig is trustable?

Thanks

[iof]

Check your retailer against http://www.resellerratings.com/ .
I bought my 20D from buydig.com and was very satisified with the experience.
Ordered on a Thurs AM with ground shipping. Got tracking number Thurs evening and the camera on Monday. It was new, US model with all standard stuff with it(charger, battery, strap, cables, software, etc).


Ron

[jay24k]

I checked buydig and theres is 399.00. Am I seeing something wrong? I'm thinking of picking it up since I bought a drebel so I can get double rebates off both.

[tim]

I was using the Canon 100 F2.8 macro USM today, when I switch back to the Tamron 28-75 it was a bit slow and noisy, but it's acceptable and takes good pics. Having F2.8 is a photo saver at times, when there's not a lot of light around.

[rdefrei1]

Just bought my lens from BuyDig $ 339.00