Buying a new lens - 28-135 IS

[vettechick99]

I've had my XT for 18 months and have been putting off buying a new lens because they are so pricey. But I can't handle it anymore and I'm about to drop some cash on one.

I've researched them pretty well and the Canon 28-135 IS is at the top of my list. I plan on having this lens be my everyday lens so it should be versatile. I want a good zoom that will allow me to take close ups from a moderate distance (e.g. getting a parade facial shot from the side of the street), but it can't be heavy.

First, do you have this lens and are you happy with it?

Second, what is the best price you've seen? Shipping is an important factor as I have to order today to get it in time for my beach trip next Tuesday.

Third, if you have a similar (non-Canon) lens that you recommend, please tell me what you have.

Thanks for the expertise. And posting samples of your work with this lens would be helpful as well!

 

[Anewman]

Second, what is the best price you've seen? Shipping is an important factor as I have to order today to get it in time for my beach trip next Tuesday.

Buydig has it for just under $400 free shipping and no tax, I have seen it go for more used on Ebay.

 

[mabas9395]

I have this lens, and before Jan gets a chance to voice her opinion, let me say that its a pretty decent lens for the price. Some people on this board have had a bad experience with it but I really think that is the exception rather than the rule.

The length is perfect for me for a walk-around lens and the IS really helps, eventhough it is an older version of IS, the newer version is even better. The lens isn't that sharp wide open but if all you have to compare it to is the kit lens, you won't notice it that much. But once you get a faster/better lens, you start to realize what it can't do. Until then, you should be happy with it, I was/am.

I do suggest getting the hood for it, both for protection as well as sun glare.

 

[PoohJen]

an alternative non-IS consideration is the Sigma 18-125. I use this as my primary lens; bought it used on eBay and (fortunately!) it was in like-new, perfect condition.

Here's some shots to give you an idea of the range - not of the photographer's ability!

This picture of Fantasmic, while blurry, was taken at night from the very last row of the arena, handheld.

I use the lens primarily for action (sports) shots, and I've been very pleased with the results:

Good luck and enjoy!

 

[vettechick99]

Thanks for all the comments so far. That's a great price for the lens - I have seen used ones go for more on ebay, too!

Great shots, PoohJen. Makes me excited to have a lens that gets nice and close.

And I will pick up a hood - thanks for the suggestion.

Any other thoughts?

 

[Lizziejane]

I've been eyeballing this one too to replace the 18-55 kit lens. However, my husband would prefer the 17-85. He shoots wide, I shoot closer - go figure! I'm really interested to see what people have to say about your pick, so I hope you don't mind me tagging along on this thread!

 

[vettechick99]

I've been eyeballing this one too to replace the 18-55 kit lens. However, my husband would prefer the 17-85. He shoots wide, I shoot closer - go figure! I'm really interested to see what people have to say about your pick, so I hope you don't mind me tagging along on this thread!

Not at all. I just purchased it from buydig and should get it in a few days. I'll post some test shots so you can see how it looks. And I'm still very amateurish, so if I can make it work, anyone can!

 

[jann1033]

I have this lens, and before Jan gets a chance to voice her opinion, let me say that its a pretty decent lens for the price. Some people on this board have had a bad experience with it but I really think that is the exception rather than the rule.

The length is perfect for me for a walk-around lens and the IS really helps, eventhough it is an older version of IS, the newer version is even better. The lens isn't that sharp wide open but if all you have to compare it to is the kit lens, you won't notice it that much. But once you get a faster/better lens, you start to realize what it can't do. Until then, you should be happy with it, I was/am.

I do suggest getting the hood for it, both for protection as well as sun glare.

hey i think i might resent that implication

my first lens had a bunch of problems, ISreplaced twice, canon couldn't get it back to the sharpness or lack of purple fringing it had when i got it yadayadayada... but happy ending, they replaced my rebel xt and lens and both seem to be doing well( and canon is back in my good graces ). if i hadn't had all the problems i probably would use it more than i do but since i didn't have it working for most of the time i have owned it i bought other lenses i use instead now.
so pros:

i had 2 sharp copies with little ca ( eventually) so that seems like the norm for that lens is sharp with little ca
liked the length as a walk around
like the is( when it worked)
cons:

it's not quite wide enough for wide angle
the IS still makes me nervous ( although canon swears mine was an unusual problem and think they were being truthful since they sent it to a lab other than the normal tech support to look at it after they couldn't fix it and according to one guy it was causing quite the "buzz")
it's a little heavy for a walkaround.( not horrendous but my neck feels it after a while)


i have to search for a photo to post

 

[RadioNate]

hey i think i might resent that implication

my first lens had a bunch of problems, ISreplaced twice, canon couldn't get it back to the sharpness or lack of purple fringing it had when i got it yadayadayada... but happy ending, they replaced my rebel xt and lens and both seem to be doing well( and canon is back in my good graces ). if i hadn't had all the problems i probably would use it more than i do but since i didn't have it working for most of the time i have owned it i bought other lenses i use instead now.
so pros:

i had 2 sharp copies with little ca ( eventually) so that seems like the norm for that lens is sharp with little ca
liked the length as a walk around
like the is( when it worked)
cons:

it's not quite wide enough for wide angle
the IS still makes me nervous ( although canon swears mine was an unusual problem and think they were being truthful since they sent it to a lab other than the normal tech support to look at it after they couldn't fix it and according to one guy it was causing quite the "buzz")
it's a little heavy for a walkaround.( not horrendous but my neck feels it after a while)


i have to search for a photo to post

Hey Jann can you PM me with the details of your broken IS? I don't think mine is working on my 28-135. I still get decent photos but I really think I have an IS issue that I can't really explain.

thanks!

 

[Groucho]

If you don't need to go quite as wide and can live without IS... I just picked up a Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 lens to give me a faster short-zoom lens. In the research I did, I saw the Canon 28-135mm mentioned a few times, always mentioned as being not as sharp as the Tamron. Of course, they're sort of different beasts, the Tamron being a fast zoom while the Canon is slower but with more reach and IS.

For third-party fast short-zooms, what I was able to glean is that the Tamron is the best optically while the Tokina is the best build quality. The downside is that you give up some important wide-angle coverage on most of these and the Canon one, ie, 18-27mm.

 

[brack]

I have this lens on my XTi and use it almost all of the time.

 

[DVC Jen]

I love my 28-135mm IS lens. It is my primary lens. I used it for the vast majority of the photos I took on our recent WDW trip.

Like Jan said - I can get a bit heavy when you are wearing it around your neck for any length of time - but with the XTi it was more tolerable than the 30D.

I just held onto the lens as well when it as attached to the 30D - which was most of the time.

Here are a few of the shots I took with it at WDW.

The one thing I can say I am not 100% happy about with this lens - it doesn't like low lighting at all. I really have to work with it to get it to perform well in low light. In normal daylight however, it does great.

 

[vettechick99]

DVCJen, those are exactly the sorts of shots I was hoping to get!

But I'm disappointed that you say it's not strong in low light. Low light conditions are my cryptonite - I can't take a good picture to save my life! What settings do you use to combat that?

 

[DVC Jen]

I don't - I switch lenses.

I did however do fireworks shots with the lens. Turned off the image stability - and set the shutter speed between 2 and 5 seconds. It did really well.

I did that at WDW - used the tripod on our last night at the Magic Kingdom. They turned out pretty well - except for 'hat head guy" who thought it was hysterical to stand right in front of my tripod - blocking a lot of the shot.


I used it again just over a week ago to do our local fireworks and they turned out much better. I will post them probably later today - or tomorrow.

At some point I would love to get a faster IS lens - but I have a feeling that is not in the works for me for quite some time - especially now that I am no longer bringing in an income.

You will probably really enjoy the lens - and hopefully you will not get a lemon like Jan did. If you do a lot of really low light stuff - there is always the 50mm f/1.8 lens. I think you can still get it on Amazon for less than 100.00

Many people here swear by it - and I have it. I just can't get it to focus as well as I would like. I am sure that is not any fault of the lens - but just my inexperience.

 

[vettechick99]

Thanks, Jen, I would love to see the fireworks pics!

I actually have that lens - bought it a few years ago for my film Rebel. Which is how I knew my kit lenses were crap! The first roll of film I took with it - nearly every picture was perfection. And that's not because I'm that good!

One day maybe we'll all be able to afford those high-end lenses. I mean its an L series lens or college for our kids? Hmmm....

 

[jann1033]

i think the problem with low light is because by the time you get to around 50mm, it's aperture is only 5.6 or so. i have the same complaint as well and so just use my 50mm or 70-200 when i need lower light. not the best photo but only have a couple since i haven't really used the new lens much but rebel xt and 28-135 lens

i took this with the white background to send to Jackson and Perkins since the rose is supposed to be a pale pink english rose and it was tagged (both paper tagand metal tag around the rose) wrong and is really an orange tea rose...see all "lemons" and me have a natural attraction to each other, not just photographic oriented "lemons"

 

[vettechick99]

I do suggest getting the hood for it, both for protection as well as sun glare.

mabas, what do you know about generic hoods? Are they just as good as the Canon brand?

 

[DVC Jen]

don't forget to check out ebay and amazon for pretty good deals on the lens hood. I got the canon hood to go with the lens and I think it was around 20.00. I ordered if from amazon. I have seen them going for less on ebay.