Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 14 Oct 2009 (Wednesday) 00:29
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

How is the Canon 18-135mm IS and other options?

 
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,383 posts
Gallery: 565 photos
Likes: 2690
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Oct 14, 2009 03:05 |  #16

JayStar86 wrote in post #8818787 (external link)
very nice... that 17-55 is very sharp lens indeed!
thanks again for your help..... i will have to decide my priorities and decide on a lens based on that.

No problem, thats what i recommend you do :)

oh and the first one there was handheld braced against glass and was a 1.6 second exposure ;) IS is great...


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Oteck
Senior Member
570 posts
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver B.C.
     
Oct 14, 2009 03:34 |  #17

Depending on what you shoot should determine what you need. I mostly use the 17-55 for a walk around and seldom use the 70-200 range.


Canon 7D, 50D/BG-E2N, 580EXII
EF-s 10-22mm, EF-s 17-55mm 2.8 [70-200mm IS 2.8L[COLOR=Red][COLOR=Blac​k]][85L[COLOR=Red] [COLOR=Black]1.2] (coming soon 35L II? [COLOR=Red][COLOR=Blac​k]50L II?)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JayStar86
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,531 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: VanCity, BC
     
Oct 14, 2009 04:34 |  #18

sounds great folks... i thank all for the input I think I have finally settled on a combination of body and lens.... its as follow's:

Canon 7D $1700
Tamron 17-50 F2.8 with VC(aka. IS) $650
Canon 70-200 F4.0 IS $1235

I think that will give me a balance of good range, good camera and good lenses to cover all aspects of photography that Im interested in.... maybe add a wide angle prime in there later and Im all set to go for quite some time IMO. Thats probably the best suited to my budget ( still a little over but I can deal with that) and serve my needs and purposes.

If anyone has any input on that setup, please do chime in... I will be buying all this stuff in a few days... cant wait.... on that note anyone got an opinion on extended warranties and such like Mack and what not? please do tell. thanks everyone!


---Jay---
Gear and Feedback
flikr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nureality
Goldmember
3,611 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2008
     
Oct 14, 2009 05:49 |  #19

Has the 18-135 IS even hit shelves yet? or the 15-85IS USM?

Of the two the 15-85IS USM is the truly interesting one.

The 18-135IS does not have USM and hence I'd not consider it. Honestly, if it came down to the 18-135IS and the 28-135IS USM, I'd probably get the 28-135IS USM - simply because of the USM. Mind, you, I own 2 of those lenses (28-135IS) now and won't be using either.

The 15-85IS USM is an interesting lens to me, even with the 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM in my bag. I would consider picking one up if I were traveling to a less-than-safe place and didn't want to take my high-ticket items with me. The 15-85IS would take the place of my 11-16 f/2.8 and 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM in such a scenario - yes, I'd lose some capabilities (11-15mm, f/2.8-f/3.5-5.6), but gain some peace of mind. Its not just a cheaper lens than the pair, but its also less conspicuous. Its fairly compact, yet more capable than the 17-85IS or the 18-55IS's.


Alan "NuReality" Fronshtein
Gear List | PBase |  (external link)flickr (external link)
Lots of Fun, Lots of Laughs, Happy Trigger Finger!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lildexmom
Senior Member
Avatar
258 posts
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Mid Michigan
     
Oct 14, 2009 05:58 as a reply to  @ nureality's post |  #20

They got the Canon 15-85mm in at Best Buy this week - go check it out :cool:


Canon ~ 7D, 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS,
and, 430EX ll

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
barrett14
Senior Member
793 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Fort Worth Texas
     
Oct 14, 2009 08:21 |  #21

I just bought a 18-135 "used" from someone who is parting it from their 7D kit. It is supposed to get in today, and I plan on taking it to an NHL game on Friday for some pictures. One user said this lens is incredibly "soft" at 18. I am new to photography and don't really know what this means, but I bought this as a versatile lens to take with me on vacation (I am going skiing in December and didn't want to be changing lenses up on the slopes). That said I was hoping to get some good landscape shots of the mountain (presumably at 18mm). Will this work for me? I am obviously not a professional and am new to photography. I know there are better lenses out there like the 17-50 or whatever it is, but I was just going for versatility.

So I guess what I am getting at is, even for my casual needs am I going to regret getting this? I guess it isn't a huge deal because I am sure I can resell it for what I paid for it. ($400 with filter). I would have liked to get the 15-85 but the price drove me away. Maybe I should have waited for a used 15-85 to come up.. what is the difference in sharpness between the 15-85 and the 18-135?


flickr (external link)
500px (external link)
5D Mark III
24-105L, 16-35L II, 70-300L, 8-15L Fisheye, 50mm 1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
plasticmotif
Goldmember
Avatar
3,174 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Tennessee
     
Oct 14, 2009 08:53 |  #22

JayStar86 wrote in post #8818974 (external link)
sounds great folks... i thank all for the input I think I have finally settled on a combination of body and lens.... its as follow's:

Canon 7D $1700
Tamron 17-50 F2.8 with VC(aka. IS) $650
Canon 70-200 F4.0 IS $1235


I think that will give me a balance of good range, good camera and good lenses to cover all aspects of photography that Im interested in.... maybe add a wide angle prime in there later and Im all set to go for quite some time IMO. Thats probably the best suited to my budget ( still a little over but I can deal with that) and serve my needs and purposes.

If anyone has any input on that setup, please do chime in... I will be buying all this stuff in a few days... cant wait.... on that note anyone got an opinion on extended warranties and such like Mack and what not? please do tell. thanks everyone!

Great choices. I use the 17-50 non-VC version so much that if the VC version turns out to be the same optically I'll snap it up in a heartbeat.


Mac P.
My Zenfolio (external link) My Photo Blog (external link) My Equipment
https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=14172975#po​st14172975

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,246 posts
Likes: 2030
Joined Nov 2005
Location: San Diego County, California, USA
     
Oct 14, 2009 10:29 as a reply to  @ post 8818787 |  #23

It depends on what you want to do with the lens...

18-135mm is a really nice focal range but, this would not be the lens for me. I demand top-notch IQ and fast AF along with a fast f/stop.

If I did not have this desire for quality, I would be pretty happy with a lens with a 18-200mm focal length.

I know that this focal length would cover 90-95% of my general purpose and travel photography needs because I use a 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and a 70-200mm f/4L IS lens on a 30D and a 40D camera.

This combo is a LOT heavier and a LOT more expensive than an 18-200mm lens on a single camera but, it is a LOT more versatile also.

The f/2.8 aperture in the lower focal lengths and even the f/4 aperture at the longer lengths gives me a LOT more freedom to shoot in lower light areas.

If money were a consideration, I would look into the combination of the Tamron or Sigma 17-50mm lenses along with the 55-250mm IS lens. I would then have a setup which would suffice for quite a long time. I could always save up and upgrade the 55-250mm IS lens but, that would probably not be necessary unless I wanted to make big prints.


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,383 posts
Gallery: 565 photos
Likes: 2690
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Oct 14, 2009 11:33 |  #24

JayStar86 wrote in post #8818974 (external link)
sounds great folks... i thank all for the input I think I have finally settled on a combination of body and lens.... its as follow's:

Canon 7D $1700
Tamron 17-50 F2.8 with VC(aka. IS) $650
Canon 70-200 F4.0 IS $1235

If anyone has any input on that setup, please do chime in... I will be buying all this stuff in a few days... cant wait.... on that note anyone got an opinion on extended warranties and such like Mack and what not? please do tell. thanks everyone!


Sounds good, my only complaint is that I hate Tamron's AF..in my experience its not been the best in the world...I would definately try one before i bought it at least


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnbachel
Member
204 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Albany, NY area
     
Oct 14, 2009 11:54 |  #25

There are sample test images of the new Canon here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com …ample-Crops.aspx?Lens=678 (external link)

There are limits to what you can learn from them, though -- most of us spend time taking pictures of people, landscapes, animals, etc, not line charts.

My guess is that the 18-135 will serve most people well. I didn't go for it because it's no better than my Sigma 18-125 OS, which costs $350.


John

_______________

Equipment: 50D, Sigma 17-70 f:2.8-4 OS, Sigma 70-300 OS, Metz Mecablitz 48 AF-1 strobe.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JayStar86
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,531 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: VanCity, BC
     
Oct 14, 2009 12:44 |  #26

thanks for the input everyone so far... great discussion... this forum rules!

plasticmotif wrote in post #8819752 (external link)
Great choices. I use the 17-50 non-VC version so much that if the VC version turns out to be the same optically I'll snap it up in a heartbeat.

^^^^^ Yes, ive seen the shots with the Tamron and Sigma 17-50 and both are impressive lens for the price... the reason im swayed to go with with Tamron is the now availibility of VC on it... which is huge IMO.

Optically the New Tamron from the little that is on the net about it is optically similar maybe a tad better..... but a couple people are saying the focusing on the unit has been improved:D They say is a littler faster then beofore and much more quieter... which is a good sign.... I think this New Tamron closes the gap quiet a bit between it and the Canon 17-55..... with the Canon still being quite a bit better but at almost double the price, though!

When I get the lens I will post up what i think about it for sure.... its too bad I haven't used the older model lens to compare to!

KenjiS wrote in post #8820666 (external link)
Sounds good, my only complaint is that I hate Tamron's AF..in my experience its not been the best in the world...I would definately try one before i bought it at least

^^^^ Thanks for the WISE input... I agree and I will try my best to try one out before buying!


---Jay---
Gear and Feedback
flikr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
smmokan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,202 posts
Likes: 140
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Boulder, CO
     
Oct 14, 2009 16:12 |  #27

johnbachel wrote in post #8820806 (external link)
My guess is that the 18-135 will serve most people well. I didn't go for it because it's no better than my Sigma 18-125 OS, which costs $350.

I second this... the Sigma 18-125 OS is an excellent lens if you can find it used.

I got mine for $200. :)


www.ChasingEpicMTB.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,893 views & 0 likes for this thread
How is the Canon 18-135mm IS and other options?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is bubbles53
828 guests, 328 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.