28-135 IS Portraits and Macro

Ritz is a joke. Your response should have been, "If you were a REAL photography shop you WOULD have that kind of equipment!" I went into a Ritz here in NH and asked about a battery grip for my Rebel T2 film camera. I had seen them online for about $36.00 at Adorama, B&H, and Abes of Maine... you know, the REAL photography stores...:P and the guy(kid is more like it) told me that it was a special order item that would take up to 6 weeks to get in and would cost me $120.00. He looked at me like I was lying when I said I could get it by the end of the week and for $40something with s/h. When I asked about prime lenses.. (the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 in particular) he acted like I was behind in the times by saying that today's zooms are so superior to zooms of the past that primes are no longer being used by pro's. He told me that I'd be better off with his Quantaray 28-70mm lens in terms of quality and flexibility than any prime lens. Needless to say, I bought my camera gear from Adorama and B&H.

We used to have a wonderful camera shop here in Portland called Camera World of Oregon. It was a great store, and they would meet or beat B&H or Adorama's pricing on most items. They had great sales people int the store and also offered mail order. The biggest advantage for me was that I could buy local (no sales tax in Oregon), get good prices, and also get good advice and support. In 2001, the recession took them down and they were bought out by Ritz. In my opinion, they' are now a joke. Now it's all about sales and not about knowledge or support.

As far as the 28-135 IS goes, treat it like a tool. If you intend to use it only in the studio where you are controlling the lighting and the background, and it does what you want for the price you're willing to pay, go for it. Especially if you've seen examples of the results and you like them. If you also want to use it for a walk around lens as well, then you do have other factors to consider, such as the bokeh as mentioned above, and low light capability.

I tend to go with primes for studio work, but that's just my style and methodology. Some people don't care for primes because they can be too sharp for portraits. I seldom ask advice on internet boards about lenses because, with the few rare exceptions, there's no true consensus of opinion. Everyone will tell you about his or her favorite lens, and their style for portraits (or sports, or wildife, or nature) photography and it becomes hard to separate fact from opinon.

Good luck, no matter what your choice turns out to be.

Mark

Wow, Didnt mean to start an Anti Ritz movment! 99% of the people who work in those stores dont know a whole lot about much (I like to think that I know enough to answer most questions and give pretty sound advice)

Alright on to the 2nd part of the question, Macro work? I know the lens says "Macro" on it, But I'm talking real Macro, 1:1 or better, does anyone know how many Ext. tubes I would need to get down to 1:1?

Thanks

-Johnny

Depends on what focal length you want to/can work at. a lens at 1:1 has an extension equal to the focal length (that's in addition to the lens' basic length), so you'd need between 28 and 135 mm of tubes. That also assumes that you'd have a moderate working distance in front of the lens. At 28 mm, you might actually need to be almost touching the subject to get life-size.

I didn't mean to start that Ritz Camera thing, but I'm actually glad to hear that other people get that "If you weren't so stupid" response. I agree with Jon. Consider the range of the subjects you work with most and go from there. I did a photo shoot at a home on Sat. where the family room was a good size, but with the cropping on my 10D, I couldn't use my 50mm f1.4 or my 85mm f1.8 at all for more than one person in a shot. I ended up using my 28-135 IS anyway because my 19-35 Tamron was too wide. I was glad I had all my lenses that evening.

SuzyView
And I have to admit, I've met some really wonderful salespeople in stores and on-line that know what they are talking about.

My "standard" lens for many years now has been the 28-105 f3.5/4.5. I recently bought a 28-135 IS lens, because I wanted the benefit of the IS when walking around and taking pictures (mainly landscapes), without a tripod. I am very impressed with my pictures so far.

I have a question: I also have extension tubes, but I have not used them in combination with the 28-135 yet. Does the IS function still work, with the extension tubes?

Should, since they need to carry power to the lens for the diaphragm to work. IS doesn't need anything from the body but power.

Until I got the 28-70/2.8L I used this lens a lot for just about everything, but since model photography and portraits is what I shoot obviously I did a lot of them. I kept the lens for backup because it is a great lens (although not as good as my 28-70 (except right now it is way better)). I used it for 2-3 years before getting the 28-70L. I also broke it twice (once under warranty) so that lets you know how much I used/abused it.

It has a macro function on it so it has some limited macro ability. I have played with it and it seemed to work fairly well up close. However, I don't ever remember trying it with my extension tube.

The primary difference other then aperture and focal length differences between 28-70L and 28-135 IS is the 28-70/2.8L just produces a nicer looking color straight out of the camera. Also my 28-70 feels better on the 1DsMkII I own, while the 28-135 felt better balanced on the 10D and D60.

Unfortunately for me, until my 28-70 gets back from repair the 28-135 will be my most used lens as that is the range I use the most for my photography. Luckily the 28-135 is still a good lens so I won't mind using it.

Just my experience and opinion,

Good info Johnny, where can you get the Tamron 28-75 For $275.00...I'd like to know that, thanks...