EF 28-135mm compatible with full frame?

Is EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens compatible with full frame cameras?

All EF lens is. So the answer is yes.

But trust me, you wouldn't want to use such a lens on a ff camera

All the lenses listed in your signature are FF lenses.

kin2son wrote in post #14316812
All EF lens is. So the answer is yes.

But trust me, you wouldn't want to use such a lens on a ff camera

I don't know why not... Have you ever actually used one? I've used three different ones over the years - on film, crop digital and FF DSLRs and IMO it's an excellent lens for the money. Especially if you buy used... there are so many around it's pretty easy to find them for under $250. It's pretty hard to tell apart images shot with 28-135, 24-70, which I also have and use a lot, and 24-105, which I've used a few times but don't own. The L-series are better built, better sealed, slightly better corrected, and likely will be more durable over the long run. But, hey, for the money the 28-135 makes a darned nice walkaround lens. Fast focusing USM, close focusing, IS that's good for two or three stops. The 28-135's main weakness is it's a little soft out at 135mm... just a little, stop down to f8 if it's critical. Oh, and it's common for the 28-135 to have "zoom creep"... but that happens sometimes with the 24-105, too.

EF / DG / Di / FX are full frame compatible
EF-S / DC / Di II /DX are lenses designed for 1.5/1.6 crop cameras
Canon / Sigma / Tamron / Tokina

all but the EF-S will mount on your full frame unmodified without danger to your camera

mike cabilangan wrote in post #14316900
all but the EF-S will mount on your full frame unmodified without danger to your camera

That's not true. Some EF-S lenses will hit the mirror when taking a picture. So I would say that is a little danger.

kin2son wrote in post #14316812
All EF lens is. So the answer is yes.

But trust me, you wouldn't want to use such a lens on a ff camera

Although I prefer my 24-105L I have gotten some excellent shots with the 28-135mm on full frame.

mike cabilangan wrote in post #14316900
EF / DG / Di / FX are full frame compatible
EF-S / DC / Di II /DX are lenses designed for 1.5/1.6 crop cameras
Canon / Sigma / Tamron / Tokina

all but the EF-S will mount on your full frame unmodified without danger to your camera

Raylon wrote in post #14317024
That's not true. Some EF-S lenses will hit the mirror when taking a picture. So I would say that is a little danger.

yes, i will highlight the keyword in my post so as not to be misunderstood by people

amfoto1 wrote in post #14316858
I don't know why not... Have you ever actually used one? I've used three different ones over the years - on film, crop digital and FF DSLRs and IMO it's an excellent lens for the money. Especially if you buy used... there are so many around it's pretty easy to find them for under $250. It's pretty hard to tell apart images shot with 28-135, 24-70, which I also have and use a lot, and 24-105, which I've used a few times but don't own. The L-series are better built, better sealed, slightly better corrected, and likely will be more durable over the long run. But, hey, for the money the 28-135 makes a darned nice walkaround lens. Fast focusing USM, close focusing, IS that's good for two or three stops. The 28-135's main weakness is it's a little soft out at 135mm... just a little, stop down to f8 if it's critical. Oh, and it's common for the 28-135 to have "zoom creep"... but that happens sometimes with the 24-105, too.

Having two 28-135 lenses and a 24-70L I fully agree with you ,the reach of the 28-135 makes it a great tool on my film bodies and my 1D

mike cabilangan wrote in post #14317439
yes, i will highlight the keyword in my post so as not to be misunderstood by people

Oops, definitely read right over that but.

My 28-135 is sharper than my 24-70 in center frame, but the color saturation and contrast is no where near as nice as the 24-70. And, the AF is a little slow for sports. But for a light walkaround lens that covers most of the range I shoot AND with IS that the 24-70 does not have, I love it!

Now that I got the 24-105mm, I was planning to sell my 28-135mm. The color/contrast is better on the L and I like the constant f4. The thing I like the least about the 28-135mm on FF is that it's not wide enough (but I like that it is long enough). If only canon would make it a 24-135mm L f2.8 IS USM, that would be sweet (and heavy, and expensive).

I was planning to sell it, but now I have an EOS-3 film camera on it's way. I want to try out shooting slide film, and I may keep it for use on the EOS-3.

So how would this lens fare on a 1D Mark III? Looking for a cheap walk-around lens, also for vacations and family shots.

We often (without good reason) overlook the older lenses and many have merit. I have an old (1990's) EF 28-105mm USM non IS. When I acquired my 60D I put the lens through some tests and was amazed at the IQ. The build quality of the lens is quite good, probably best described as falling between the "standard" range of Canon lenses today and the "L". This lens can be had for about $250 used. Some people feel you have to be careful on the older lenses because of the potential of a failing ribbon cable for the USM drives. As much use as this lens has had, and my "old" EF 75-300 USM IS, I wonder if they didn't built them better years ago.

I was actually planning on getting a 28-135 IS myself, specifically for vacations. It’s much lighter than my 24-70L and it has IS, not to mention the zoom all the way up to 135mm.