A&P What do you think of this lens?

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by Fubar, Aug 25, 2005.

  1. Fubar

    Fubar OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,274
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    PA
    I'm thinking of getting this lens, Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. Anyone have any experience with it? If so, would you recommend it?

    It will be used with a Canon 20D. So far the only other lenses I have are the kit lens (EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6) and the EF 50mm f/1.8. I'm looking for something with a little bit more range and better quality than the kit lens.
     
  2. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    its not a bad lens but why wouldn't you go for a telephoto?
     
  3. Fubar

    Fubar OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,274
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    PA
    What lens would you suggest?
     
  4. sony

    sony Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    112,723
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Suprise. The 28-135 is a consumer lens, just like the 18-55. They're both around the same quality range. :wavey:
     
  5. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    if you want to shoot af f/8 or faster don't expect a sharp image

    its a horrible lens personally, for that amount you can do better.

    The tamron 28-75 F/2.8 comes to mind first
     
  6. siniquezu

    siniquezu New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    8,669
    Likes Received:
    0
    70-200 4L...so I've heard.
     
  7. Fubar

    Fubar OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,274
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    PA
    Are there any lenses that rank above the one I listed? My budget is roughly $800.
     
  8. Fubar

    Fubar OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,274
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    PA
    Thanks, I'll look into that lens.
     
  9. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    you could probably do the 28-75 and 70-200, especially if you went with used ones. theres little to go wrong with lenses, and its easy to see when something is, so used lenses are often a great deal. All but 1 of my lenses were bought used, and that includes 3 L series
     
  10. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    these are great suggestions
     
  11. Snafu

    Snafu more than meets the eye

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2001
    Messages:
    1,365
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    Queens, NY
  12. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    more than his budget, but a good choice too. We'll have to wat a little while to see what its really like though
     
  13. Snafu

    Snafu more than meets the eye

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2001
    Messages:
    1,365
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    Queens, NY
    Yea it's a little more than his budget but I figured I throw it out there as another option for him since he didn't say he needed a new lense tomorrow.

    I too am going to wait and see what they say about this new 24-105...could be my new walk around lense.

    Although he did say he needed more reach and the 24-105 may not be enough.

    How about a used 70-200 2.8L?

    or a 70-300 DO IS?
     
  14. Eric Happy Meal

    Eric Happy Meal New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    21,811
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Redondo Beach
    my friend has it and absolutely loves it. very nice lens imo.
     
  15. PitScar

    PitScar Yeah, that's my realtor's name

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2004
    Messages:
    575
    Likes Received:
    0
    check out http://www.fredmiranda.com for lens reviews. That 24-105 is a great lens and will be my next purchase. [edit] Ive used one before [/edit]


    [doubleedit] Woops, just clarified that I had used a 28-105 f3.5-4.5 USM AF, not the 24-105 pictured. FWIW, the 28-105 was perfect as a daily walkaround
     
  16. sony

    sony Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    112,723
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    it's so small and cute :cuddle:

    the 70-2 f4 i mean :love:
     
  17. sony

    sony Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    112,723
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    for all you know it could be soft from 24mm to 105mm up until f/8 :run:
     
  18. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0

    you've used a lens only Canon emplyees have had access to? But yet the more famous internet reviewers and professional photographers haven't?
     
  19. PitScar

    PitScar Yeah, that's my realtor's name

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2004
    Messages:
    575
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, see my edit, i realized that right after i posted
     
  20. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0

    man i hope that whatever flaw it has is standard. i can't take seeing any more of "is my 24-70 soft? this is my 5th one and it still look soft at 2.8 at the min focusing distance on a small jpeg"

    end rant
     

Share This Page