canon 28-135 IS

How is the overall function and quality of this lens? I don't see any threads on it. I see it comes with some of the kits in the CLP and was wondering if it was worth getting.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=188563

It's a really nice lens. I have one.

CameraMan wrote in post #14376741
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=188563

It's a really nice lens. I have one.

Thanks.....I didnt see that.

It's kind of a slow thread but there are some great samples there. A few are mine.

This was the first digital lens that I purchased and my first still photography zoom lens.

It is a decent lens but, not a great lens. I replaced it with a 24-70mm f/2.8L lens because I wanted a constant f/2.8 aperture.

My son-in-law shoots with it now on the Canon XT I gave him. He is perfectly happy with it...

here is a sample...

IMAGE LINK: http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com …461545&k=PV2Q65​G&lb=1&s=A

I love my 28-135. The only issue is it gets a bit loose after a while. When the camera is facing down, or if your walking with the camera, it tends to zoom out. Other then that, it has been a wonderful lens for the price. Good carry around lens for the range, unless you are wanting something light weight. I cant compare it to anything, but it seems pretty heavy to me.

Its my goto lens. Just walking the yard or taking a drive, its always on the camera. My 100-400 I treasure so It stays put until I have serious time.

Hardrock40 wrote in post #14377176
Its my goto lens. Just walking the yard or taking a drive, its always on the camera. My 100-400 I treasure so It stays put until I have serious time.

Pictures please!! I want a pic of you walking the yard!

For the $225-ish that I see these sell for, they're quite a bargain. I loved my 28-135, but after trying out and then buying the 24-105L, I sold it. I wasn't unhappy with it at all, but I was more happy with the L.

Yup, for the price of it used you can't beat it. I would say typical price is from 200-240. I've seen em sell as low as 175 before.

For the price it's a great lens, although 28 is definately not wide enough on a crop so I sold mine for my tamron.

The 24-105L and 24-70L will give you better built lenses, but you'll see little if any difference in image quality. The 28-135 is a real bargain lens on the used market. There are lots and lots of copies out there. Yes, it's not built or sealed as well as the L-series, but what the heck for 1/5 the price (or less).

The 28-135 is sort of the Rodney Dangerfield of Canon lenses... it gets no respect. Maybe that's because it's been sold so often in kit with various cameras and people think of it as a kit lens. It's several notches better than most kit lenses actually: EF, IS, USM, close focus, mid-grade build quality (gold stripe).... not to mention good image quality and a nice walk-around range of focal lengths. You actually won't find all these in another lens in the Canon line-up, without spending 5X as much.

It is a wee bit soft all the way out at 135mm... but that can be helped by stopping down a little. It won't disappoint at other focal lengths. In fact, it has less vignetting at the wide end, than the 24-105. But you won't see the difference on a crop camera, it shows up more on full frame. Get the lens hood for it, and leave off any "protection" filter (which might mess with image quality).

Yeah, zoom creep is common with it, not uncommon with the 24-105 either. It can be fixed... there was a thread here on POTN with links to some external sites, how to do it yourself. Or just use a big rubber band.

I'm sure there is a thread regarding this lens over on the Lens Photo Sample Archive.

The 28-135mm is a very nice lens for the price on the secondary market. Mine developed a focusing issue (tried it on multiple bodies) that was after years of use. I was very happy with it, and very much liked the image quality if produced.

For the price it's very hard to beat as I believe it has IS and USM, which I don't think can be had on the newer 18-135, and 18-200.

I had the 24-105 L in the past, and the 28-135 is easily to me an inferior lens in every possible way, however at $200 it is an absolute bargain. I simply wasn't using my 24-105 enough, and when I was using it typically it was for personal BS pictures where having the best quality wasn't needed. I find the 28-135 to be a much more than adequate lens for general purpose, with by no means "bad" image quality, and again, at around $200 with IS you aren't going to find much better bang for your buck.