18-55mm f3.5-5.6 & 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

Is there an advantage to using the 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 lens if you have the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens?

Other than taking off the extra weight what would be the purpose of going back to the 18-55mm?

The slightly wider angle?

Only the reach, the 18-55mm should have better IQ

Canon Rebel XT
EF-S 18-55mm II
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Well yes the there would be the slighter wider angle but other than that would the 18-55 be a better lens to use for those angles compared to a longer zoom lense which encompases those angles?

I guess what I'm asking is:

Is a shorter lens with a smaller range of zoom sharper than a longer lens, even if the longer lens encompasses the range of the shorter lens? (Everything else being equall such as the max aperatures)?

What do you mean by better "IQ"?

(sorry very new to this and don't know all the techie terms)

IQ is image quality

Image Quality

Jim G bet me too it..........

Thanks for clarifying that...

So a shorter lens will give you beter image quality at its range verseus a larger zoom lense which encompasses the smaller lenses range?

Is the IQ that much better on the shorter lenses (very noticable)?

Charles4400 wrote in post #2012814
Is the IQ that much better on the shorter lenses (very noticable)?

It shouldn't be a function of the zoom range, more a function of the lens itself. the 24-105 IS is supposed to be one of the sharpest going, and the 70-200 f/4 or f/2.8 lenses are so sharp you could cut yourself.

Wide angle zooms like the 10-22 or 17-40 or the 16-35 are great but not as inherently sharp. the kit lens is not as sharp as some lenses, but stopped down to f/8-11 is plenty sharp enough to get a good picture.

comparing the 18-55 EF-s lens with the 28-135 IS lens is not really a fair comparison. the 28-135 is designed for film bodies, and has a reputation of being not so sharp, but it is extremely popular, and for most users would be fine. If you already have one, my view is that you would not see any difference in IQ between this lens and the kit lens, under normal shooting conditions. Pixel peeping might help you see some differences, but what really matters is that you like the pictures and they print out Ok at the sizes you need.

So unless you want the wider view of the EF-s lens, or the lighter weight, the 28-135 has longer reach and IS, so I'd be inclined to use it more.

Check out The Digital Picturefor a good general lens education.

Thanks for the explanation and input Steve..this all helps out alot!

A01 wrote in post #2010840
The slightly wider angle?

Well, I'd say the considerably wider angle. Equiv to roughly 29mm vs 45mm in 35mm FOV terms. That's a difference between actually wide and roughly normal. As to IQ, I've always found the IQ from the 28-135 to be better where the ranges overlap - but I suspect I have a better-than-average copy of the 28-135 and an at-best-average 18-55. These days I hardly ever shoot either of them, but each has enough advantages that I'll keep'em for those circumstances where they'll be useful.

...Mike