A&P 17-85 IS, 28-135 IS, or 24-85

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by e.pie, Jun 28, 2007.

?

:o

  1. 17-85 IS

    2 vote(s)
    33.3%
  2. 24-85

    1 vote(s)
    16.7%
  3. 28-135 IS

    3 vote(s)
    50.0%
  1. e.pie

    e.pie Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Messages:
    91,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    KFLY
    in my quest for an affordable midrange lens to fill the gap between my 10-22 and 70-200 it's pretty much come down to these lenses, the image quality between them seems about the same, as does everything else

    so my question is:
    is it really worth the extra $100-200 to get image stabilization?

    I'm leaning towards yes, but I'd like a 2nd opinion before I drop the cash :hs:


    and what the hell I'll make it a poll too :o
     
  2. mobbarley

    mobbarley Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Sydney
    Canon EFS17-85 > thoes other ones.

    The Canon EFS17-55 2.8IS and Tamron 17-50 2.8 are better again, but you lose at the zoom end.

    Seeing as you have a 10-22, why not consider the Tamron 28-75 2.8? Some people here used to rave about this lens for some reason.
     
  3. e.pie

    e.pie Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Messages:
    91,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    KFLY
    I thought about it, but I'd like to stick with canon lenses for USM, quiet and fast :hs: :o
     
  4. ballz

    ballz Two of 'em OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,031
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    St Petersburg, FL
    I'll trade you my 17-85 IS for your 10-22 :x:
     
  5. e.pie

    e.pie Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Messages:
    91,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    KFLY
    maybe if I had an extra 10-22 just laying around :hsugh:
     
  6. e.pie

    e.pie Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Messages:
    91,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    KFLY
    right now I'm leaning towards the 28-135 IS, it's the middle one price wise, I see them go for around $300-350, and I don't think I would miss that 6mm gap too much :hsd:
     
  7. ohknaks

    ohknaks New Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,458
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    WA
    For the price you'd be better off going for the tamron 28-75. It's tack sharp.
     
  8. e.pie

    e.pie Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Messages:
    91,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    KFLY
    I want quiet and fast auto focus though :o
     
  9. ohknaks

    ohknaks New Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,458
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    WA
    It's not all that loud. Last time I was in Peru my friend had the 28-135IS and I had the Tamron. Looking at the same basic shot, the Tamron was always sharper. Here's a pic I shot with the Tamron. Just a bit of anecdotal evidence. I wasn't all that impressed with the 28-135.
     
  10. mobbarley

    mobbarley Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    9,256
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Sydney

    so save up for a 28-105L or 24-70L :mamoru:

    dont bother with the 28-135, its got good range and its IS works ok (its an older generation which is slower and noisier) but the pictures are pretty bland, the lens is clunky and feels loose when its extended, and its got a slow variable aperture.
     

Share This Page