Canon 28-135 IS vs Sigma 18-125

[wilerty]

If one were to be able to have ONLY one of these two lenses on his 350D ... which should it be? Physically they are about the same size and I understand the range, price, and IS differences. How about picture quality? Assuming I got a good 18-125, is the 28-135 still a better lens and worth the difference?

[AjP]

I don't have sigma but I do have 28-135 and I like it alot, really great walk around lense, IS working wonderful.!!!!!!

[xuxu1]

I don't have sigma but I do have 28-135 and I like it alot, really great walk around lense, IS working wonderful.!!!!!!
I don´t have sigma either but agree with the rest.
Of course the 28-135IS isn´t a "L" lens, but a great lens for the money. I´m still saving for the 24-70L and the 70-200L and the....., and the.....,and the.....:cool:

ED

[sony23]

I've got the 28-135 and a 70-200 L IS and the 28-135 is very close to the 70-200 but without the pop.

Theres no way I would sell my 28-135.

Bruce

[Glyyde]

with IS function.... I can take handheld shot at 0.3s at 135mm zoom.... 0.6s at 28mm.....

[Headcase650]

Ive got the 28-135 and loved it until I got some real glass. I picked up the tamron 28-75 f2.8 and the sigma 70-200 f2.8. I hardly, well actualy havent uses it sense. It set on my shelf collecting dust just incase something else breaks. If you shoot anything that moves the IS is usless.

Go for faster glass!

[MrChad]

find that 28mm isn't always wide enough for me that is why I got the Sigma 18-25mm vs. the Canon 28-135 IS. However, if you have the wallet the 17-85mm IS is the lens for you I think.

[chenzhan]

Don't get the Sigma 18-125. I got one and it's seriously front-focused. I did a lot of test to make sure it's not me.

[malla1962]

not sure about the sigma but i have a canon 28-135 and find it is a good lens.

[LightRules]

The 18-125DC is a very good lens, especially at its price-point. Optically it's as good or better than the 28-135IS, although the IS and USM of the Canon is a boon. If I had to choose one to keep, it'd be the Sigma though for the 18mm wide, much lower price, and generally better optics. In fact, that's what I did. See here: http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/shootout

[rklepper]

I have the 28-135 on a 350D and I love it. It takes great shots.

Doc

[queenbee288]

I got 28-135 two weeks ago and it has not been off my camera. I love it!
Char

[Glyyde]

the decision here should be based on whether u will use the wide angle or the IS function are more important....

[Hoopster]

I had the 18-125 and can confirm it is (well my copy was) an excellent lens. Great for wide angle and a decent zoom. Good colours but needed a little contrast/sharpening in PS (as most images do).

I sold it as I purchased the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 but I really miss the wide angle and am now looking for a nice fast wide lens.

The only thing of note is that the f stops increase quickly from wide end. at 60-70mm it's f5.6 which really is pretty slow and in low light you will struggle to get fast enough shutter speed unless you bump up the ISO to 1600 or even 3200 (hence my decision to go for an f2.8 lens).

I'd now always advise go for the fastest glass you can afford. (Look at the Tamron 28-75 and Sigma 24-70 f2.8 ). The Canon lens is also pretty slow but the IS however will help handheld shots in low light with the slow shutter speeds of the longer end.

Both these lenses are excellent walk around lenses and the Sigma in particular is great value. I loved it but just wanted the faster glass.

Good luck with your choice.