Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 12 Aug 2009 (Wednesday) 08:52
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

why not a 28-135?

 
shooter ­ mcgavin
Senior Member
Avatar
526 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
     
Aug 12, 2009 08:52 |  #1

I'm going to look at buying a 20D that comes with a Canon 28-135. Focal lengths aside, is there any reason why I wouldn't be happy with this as a walk-about lens? I'm an intern at a studio, so any serious shooting I do will be with those lenses and cameras at the studio, but I still wanted a Canon myself (I switched to Nikon for a bit...).

Anyway, if I like the lens, I'll use it, but is there anything to look out for specifically with this lens or any reason why it wouldn't be the best choice? I figure if it has decent build, USM, full-time manual, and IS, those factors would outweigh the disadvantage of the variable aperture. I've had bad luck with non-Canon lenses, so I definitely feel more comfortable with this than something like a Sigma 24-70 or Tamron 28-75.

Does anyone have any experience using this lens as a walk-about lens, and what are your thoughts? Thanks!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
KIP
Member
Avatar
74 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Queens
     
Aug 12, 2009 09:05 |  #2

I still use this as my walk-around. While I would love to upgrade to a 24-70L, until I can afford that it functions just fine! It has macro-esque features, and generates rather beautiful bokeh despite it's minimum f/3.5. The IS is the real reason I went for this lens (this was my upgrade from the rebel kit lens a few years back) and it's works great. The common complaints that I read about were true, but rather picky. The IS is loud. Yes, but not like lawnmower loud. Just noticeable, that's all. The front element is wobbly. Yes, it moves around in the barrel a little, but only if you wiggle it. I don't think you'll be disappointed with this lens. It's rather versatile.


https://photography-on-the.net …?p=6166215&post​count=1334

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bjyoder
Goldmember
Avatar
1,664 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Central Ohio
     
Aug 12, 2009 09:09 |  #3

The 28-135 is a good lens, it just doesn't seem to fit anymore. For crop shooters it's too long for a good wide angle, and for FF users, well they're more likely to buy the 24-105L.

I used the 28-135 as a walk-around for a while until I needed to sell it to fund another lens. You'll probably start looking for a better wide angle lens after a while, but that's all part of the addiction. ;)


Ben

500px (external link) | Website (external link) | Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
verdantsound
Senior Member
Avatar
272 posts
Joined Sep 2008
     
Aug 12, 2009 09:12 |  #4

well, you work at a studio, so you will see noticeable IQ differences between this thing and those that you work with


T2i
Sigma 30mm f1.4, Canon 80-200mm f/2.8L, Tamron 17-50mm, Canon 100mm f2.0 550 EX Flash
Budget: College Kid

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jacobsen1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,629 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Mt View, RI
     
Aug 12, 2009 10:48 as a reply to  @ verdantsound's post |  #5

I used this lens as my walk around on my film body for over 5 years. This was when we couldn't pixel peep and it was an OK lens. But on a crop, the FL is way too long for me. It's also kinda slow, but with ISOs now that's easier to deal with.


My Gear List

my sites:
benjacobsenphoto.com (external link) | newschoolofphotography​.com (external link)
GND buyers FAQ

FOR SALE: 5Dii RRS L-bracket, 430II, 12mm macro tube PM ME!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
borism
Goldmember
Avatar
3,415 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 146
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Florida, Weston
     
Aug 12, 2009 10:54 as a reply to  @ verdantsound's post |  #6

The 28-135 is a great lens for outdoors, walking around.. so why not.
I used it many times next to my Tokina 12-24 as a not so expensive walk around combo
I recall that results around 60mm to 100mm where very nice
I got very nice results with it, is not very heavy, fast focus, just not very fast for indoors and the 28mm is not wide enough as you have heard.

I wouldn't see the 28-135 competing in studio use, next to the lenses you'll find there, however is pretty sharp at f8.
I sold it to fund the 18-200 IS, it gives me comparable results at a much more usable range as a walk around lens and much more efficient IS system, but is twice the money.
But Id say why not
Visit the lens example page, you'll find very nice examples of pics using this lens


CANON 6D - SONY A6000

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lgunnz
Senior Member
Avatar
419 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 3
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Abu Dhabi
     
Aug 12, 2009 11:24 |  #7

Let's put it this way: I had the choose to replace my 28-135 with either the 24-70 or 24-105 as my walk around or get something w/ a more specialized use. I choose to get my 135L instead because I get great results from my 28-135. I couldn't justify replacing it if all I have to do is bump my saturation up a couple points and w/ Lightroom I dont even have to do the bumping, it's already set.


5DIII|24-105L|100L|135L|70-200L|28-135|430EX II|

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Aug 12, 2009 11:37 |  #8

I think the range would be too limiting since 28mm is not wide at all on a crop cam.

I'd probably do an 18-55 IS or a 24-85 3.5-4.5 for a cheaper walk around.

There is always the 17-85, but I think it costs too much for what it is.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
440roadrunner
Goldmember
1,312 posts
Joined Jul 2007
     
Aug 12, 2009 11:50 |  #9
bannedPermanent ban

shooter mcgavin wrote in post #8445307 (external link)
I'm going to look at buying a 20D that comes with a Canon 28-135.

I'd say "It depends on the price" Many buy new bodies with this lens because they can sell the lens for more than they payed (body +lens) and really didn't want it. (These routinely sell for over 300USD used, so you can always resell it. I don't think they've gone down, much used)

As another, I use one because for now I can't afford a 24-105. I've gotten some entirely great shots with this lens. For me, it fills in between my 17-55 2.8 and my 100-400L I don't find the 28mm bottom end to be all that limiting.


2-40D's, 30D, Xt, EOS-3, Elan7, ElanII 100-400L, 24-105L, 17-55IS 2.8, Sig 12-24 EX DG 4.5
Mamiya M645 1000S, 45mm 2.8, 80mm 1.9, 110mm 2.8 + 2x extender

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigBlueDodge
Goldmember
Avatar
3,726 posts
Joined May 2005
Location: Lonestar State
     
Aug 12, 2009 17:56 |  #10

The knock on the 28-135 is that

1. It's a slow lens (f/5.6 at the tele end)
2. soft wide open

I have a 28-135 and 24-70L. I originally bought the 28-135 to put on a XT for my wife, but she didn't use the camera much and the resale value on the lens is low so I figured I'd just keep it. While I use the 24-70L most of the time, when I want to travel light I'll throw on the 28-135L. I find that the lens works best If you stop the lens down to f/8.0 - f/11. It has IS, USM and an even better range than the 24-105L. If you are not out to make "art" but rather just want a okay lens for snapshots, I recommend the 28-135L. If you are critical about sharpness, then there are better options.


David (aka BigBlueDodge)
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
E ­ James ­ P
Goldmember
Avatar
1,144 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Wichita,Ks
     
Aug 12, 2009 21:30 |  #11

And there one point most people forget about this lens it can take some very good close focus photo not macro photos ,But what it does in that area it does very good .


Gearflickr (external link)
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former."
- Albert Einstein (1879-1955) . "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stax
Senior Member
Avatar
731 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Oakland
     
Aug 12, 2009 22:01 |  #12

BigBlueDodge wrote in post #8448803 (external link)
The knock on the 28-135 is that

1. It's a slow lens (f/5.6 at the tele end)
2. soft wide open

I have a 28-135 and 24-70L. I originally bought the 28-135 to put on a XT for my wife, but she didn't use the camera much and the resale value on the lens is low so I figured I'd just keep it. While I use the 24-70L most of the time, when I want to travel light I'll throw on the 28-135L. I find that the lens works best If you stop the lens down to f/8.0 - f/11. It has IS, USM and an even better range than the 24-105L. If you are not out to make "art" but rather just want a okay lens for snapshots, I recommend the 28-135L. If you are critical about sharpness, then there are better options.

+1

It is a good travel lens; my go-to when I want to be ultra light. I think it is underrated and, when bought as a kit, a great value. I have better lenses, but the 28-135 has its place in the line up.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/staxnet/ (external link)

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=865770

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nureality
Goldmember
3,611 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2008
     
Aug 12, 2009 22:13 |  #13

Its a good FREE lens, but I wouldn't pay for it if I didn't get it as a kit lens. At least not for a crop body.

It makes a great film walk-around lens tho... near perfect focal range on film, plus light, and the IS is nice. But for 1.6x crop its very "neither here nor there", its not wide enough, its not fast enough, its not sharp enough, and its not long enough.... its just not enough of anything.


Alan "NuReality" Fronshtein
Gear List | PBase |  (external link)flickr (external link)
Lots of Fun, Lots of Laughs, Happy Trigger Finger!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stax
Senior Member
Avatar
731 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Oakland
     
Aug 12, 2009 22:22 |  #14

nureality wrote in post #8449997 (external link)
Its a good FREE lens, but I wouldn't pay for it if I didn't get it as a kit lens. At least not for a crop body.

It makes a great film walk-around lens tho... near perfect focal range on film, plus light, and the IS is nice. But for 1.6x crop its very "neither here nor there", its not wide enough, its not fast enough, its not sharp enough, and its not long enough.... its just not enough of anything.


Right. I never use my 24-70 longer than 28 or my 70-200 shorter than 135.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/staxnet/ (external link)

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=865770

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shooter ­ mcgavin
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
526 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
     
Aug 13, 2009 18:47 |  #15

Thanks for all the responses everybody. I went ahead and bought the body and lens. I think I got a good deal. I bought the 20d, grip, lens with uv and polarizing filters, 3 cf cards and slingshot 100 aw for $600. I figured I couldn't go wrong, since I could turn around and sell the lens for $250 and have a nicely priced ($350) gripped 20d with accessories and nice bag.

I just used the lens at work with a big group of kids at the zoo. Functionally, it was pretty nice, but I'm so used to primes that I found myself either shooting at 28 or 135, so I might be better served by those two focal lengths in primes. I'm interested to see the results though once i get around to looking at them on my computer. Thanks again!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,207 views & 0 likes for this thread
why not a 28-135?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is shootthegroove
2961 guests, 277 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.