28-135 IS USM

Hi
Im thinking of getting a new lens guys
So far the 28-135 has teh range im looking for and also has IS which i wanted.
Does anyone who has this lens has any comments?
Would i be better of buying a faster lens???

thans
Stavros

Umm, I think you could do better if you can afford to. I am thinking about changing mine for 24-105L. Getting a lot of soft shots on a 30D. Before changing I'm going to do some tests with other lenses and my 300D. Lens is also prone to flare, but I haven't rushed to buy a hood when I have ben wanting to upgrade. If I wasn't colour blind maybe I could say something about fringeing

Two other minor factors :
28mm isn't very wide for a multi-purpose zoom on a 1.6 crop body. Means I have a difficult choice whether to have 10-22 or bird lens on the other body - and it should always be the bird lens. I bought my 28-135 as a replacement for my 18-55, didn't want to carry both, but I did miss the width sometimes - especially for architecture and landscapes.

This lens is 72mm, others are 77mm, as would be 24-105, which would take my current polarizer. What a difference a polarizer makes on landscapes. OK, another polarizer is cheaper than an L lens, but given the other considerations ...

Mike.

Well i've had this lens about 2 weeks and i absolutly love it. Its replaced my standard kit lens and makes such a difference. For me personally it wasnt worth spending the extra money on a faster lens as the IS compensates for this and can produce some very sharp images at slower speeds, although it does depend entirely what you'll be using it for! As a walk-around lens i find it hard to beat, although the next lens on my list will be a wide-angle as the short end can be a bit narrow for landscapes.
My two cents,
Ian

This is a nice lens. It's range suits me well for general walkabout lens. It is impressively sharp at 28mm but softens up the closer you get to 135mm. The IQ never gets bad, it is just better at the short end than at the long end.
The IS works very well.

I have had this lens for about a year now and have no complaints. Is it as sharp as a lens that cost 3 times as much, no.... But I bought it as a replacement for the 18-55 (as many people seem to do) and since I have the 10-22, I don't miss the wide end of the 18-55. I actually got some great shots at a wedding a few weeks ago with the 28-135 (My new Tamron 17-50 2.8 went blurry on me a few days before....).

For the money, I think its a great upgrade from the kit lens. I want to get into some L lenses now and am looking to replace the 28-135 with a 24-70 2.8.

If you get this lens, I don't think you will regret it

Bryan

How much $$$ do you have to spend? That would be the bottom line, eh?

I have this lens, and I love it. It works for me. The weight was hard to get used to after using only the kit lens for so long, but that's not a complaint.
It is my all-purpose, walkabout lens. Ditto Broncosaurus's post.

I can post some samples too if you would like

I think it's a great lens...I compare it to my 50mm 1.4, and the 85mm 1.8, primes...It's just ever so slightly at a lower resolution...

While on the wide end, it is as good as some other brand prime wide angle lenses...and it has IS...and the macro is great too...

I love mine! This was taken a week ago from last Saturday.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

I also really enjoy mine, it's odd, there was a similar post about this lens and most people said stay away from it, but none of those people have posted in here, I think this is one of the most controversial and contested lenses that canon makes.