Canon 18-135 or 28-135?

[connaughtgreen]

Just need to know your thoughts on these two lens Have to be honest i have heard a few not very nice things about them.

The reason i was interested is that it appears i can just about get all i want from either of these lenses.

There are always a large amount of both for sale making me wonder if its a viable buy.

Now i know i can get a good feed back from you on here so give it your all please.....

Many Thanks

[Geoff F]

The 18-135 is a newer version. I once had the 28-135 and found it to be a reasonable general purpose lens. Yes, you can do better at twice the price, or even more, but I found the 28-135 to be OK as a mid budget lens. There are certainly a lot of worse options.

These were, and probably still are, sometimes offered as 'kit lens' with a decent body so that may explain why people sell them on when they upgrade to a more expensive lens.

ps. I upgraded to the Canon 24-105 but didn't like it for various reasons so I now use the Tamron 24-70.

[chauncey]

IMHO...those general purpose lenses pale in comparison to primes if you're in it for the long haul.

[rpcrowe]

Yep, primes are often a reasonably priced option to get better IQ than these lenses will provide.

However, don't sell the 28-135mm IS lens too short. I cannot speak of the 18-135mm since I never used one..

I used the 28-135mm lens for my dog portraits early on with various crop frame cameras from the 10D to the 40D. The quality was quite decent...

60mm @ f/8 - crop camera


65mm @ f/8 - crop camera


51mm @ f/16 - crop camera


I did not own a full frame camera when I was shooting with the 28-135mm lens but, it is an EF lens while the 18-135mm is an EFS lens. So a photographer could use the 28-135mm lens on a full frame camera. In fact it was designed for 35mm film cameras which, of course, were full frame.

The 28-135mm suffers a bit when at its maximum focal length. I purchased a used 135mm f/2.8 SF lens to take care of that option. Without dialing in any softness, the lens is quite good from f/4 through f/11. I paid less than $100 USD for that lens (used) and still have it (although it has been gathering dust).

I now shoot with the 70-200mm f/4L IS lens which is just a wonderful piece of glass!

[connaughtgreen]

chauncey i wasnt aware that these two were general purpose release cameras i was looking for a nice walk around type of camera so i can take a range of pictures and these seem to fit the bill

[William W]

What camera(s) will you be using?

What lens(es) do you have already?

WW

[connaughtgreen]

eos 1000d....canon 18-55....50mm.....28-80....Tamron 70-300....Sigma 10-20......150-500...

[connaughtgreen]

eos 1000d....canon 18-55....50mm.....28-80....Tamron 70-300....Sigma 10-20......150-500...

I forgot to say not that it make any difference apart from the Tamron which came with the camera all the others were given or just passed to me

[connaughtgreen]

Geoff F so is the Tamron 24-70 your walk around camera then if not what do you use Many Thanks

[Geoff F]

Yes, it is my standby lens for smaller size work. Also have the Canon 70-200 which is an excellent mid length zoom which compliments the Tamron.

At one time I tended to regard Tamron as a manufacturer of budget lenses but recently they have been producing some high quality equipment. Before purchase, I checked a few reviews where they were rated slightly above the considerably more expensive Canon alternatives.

Primes are a good alternative if you do that sort of photography where the advice had always been to 'zoom with your feet'. But for me, I simply show a cliff top edge and say 'after you then'.

[William W]

Thanks for answering the questions.

I think the EF-S18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS (2009 Issue) would be the better choice of the two for a 'one solution walk around lens' to be used on your EOS 1000D.

Choosing between those two lenses: both have IS (but the 28 to 135 is really 'old IS'); both are about the same aperture through their zoom compass: but the 18 to 135 is (noticeably) much wider: and the (need of a bit more) wide end is arguably often used often wanted in a 'walk-about' lens.

Don't know why (or where) you'd "hear bad things" about the EF-S18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS - unless it is the tyre kicking brigade who are intrinsically opposed to any "kit lens".

EF-S18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS is mainly an hard plastic build, pretty quick (and accurate) auto focus; very quite sharp at F/7.1 through to F/11 and certainly not "bad" wide open.

It is about ten years younger than the EF 28 to 135 and its IS is three or four iterations advanced; the 18 to 135 has circular blades; it feels very light and would make a good "one lens walk around' mate for your 1000D - the main design purpose of the lens is 'walk around' for an APS-C camera.

***

Really there's little comparison between the older 1990's EF Kit Lenses and the newer 2000's EF-S Hard Plastic Kit Lenses. The newer models just cream the older issue on all accounts: including the fact that the EF28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (1998 issue), is no longer supported.

***

If you are using mainly Daylight, or Flash, then the ISO capacity of the 1000D will allow (mostly) your lenses to be used at a reasonable mid aperture.

***

If your type of Photography dictates low light work, or you seek some other specialist field of Photography, like Macro work or specialist Portraiture (only two of many examples) then it would probably be better to re assess your whole kit and consider upgrading the Camera.

It is unclear if you use (or do not use) all the other lenses, (and I note that all except one were gratis) - but there's one assumption which poses a question in my mind - if you make a lot of use of the Sigma 150 to 500, then it's likely that an upgrade of the camera body would be of substantial benefit (apropos Higher Quality High ISO and faster/accurate AF).

***

Maybe you're at the crossroad in your Photography Journey and, with the experience now of "doing Photography' for a few years - you are generally thinking "what do I do with this kit that mainly has come in dribs and drabs to me?'.

Maybe it is time that you purposefully choose a new kit with some defined outcomes in mind: if that is the case then my advice is to consider your whole kit and ask a different question beginning with outline the type of Photography in which you are interested and as a result consider shedding what you do not require and buying gear that is more tailored and more modern and better suited to your needs and wants.

WW

(meant to mention that I've used the EF-S 18 to 135 - quite a lot - and I still have the original incantation of the 28 to 135 being the 35 to 135 - but I don't think I have ever used the 28 to 135 - certainly I, nor the studio, has never owned one - but as mentioned it is quite an old lens.)

[rpcrowe]

"but I don't think I have ever used the 28 to 135 - certainly I, nor the studio, has never owned one - but as mentioned it is quite an old lens."

Yep, quite an oldie. The EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS was the first Image Stabilized lens put out by Canon... It was introduced along with the 50mm f/1.8 Mark I (which wasn't called a Mark I until the Mark II came along) and the very unusual EF 135mm f/2.8 SF (for soft focus) lens. I have all three of these lenses in my collection and occasionally use them. But, they certainly don't number among my go-to lenses for serious work...

[inkista]

The 18-135 STM is an updated lens that more or less replaced the 28-135 as a mid-grade kit lens for some prosumer bodies. The 18-28 mm range definitely is more meaningful for a crop shooter. However, it's still a consumer/midgrade lens, and it overlaps with your 28-80 and 18-55.

If you want to stick with a crop body, then I'd actually say replace the 18-55/28-135 with an EF-S 15-85 IS USM or the EF-S 17-55/2.8 USM instead, if you want a higher-quality walkaround zoom, or the EF-S 18-200 IS if what you really want is a superzoom.

If you plan on moving to full frame relatively soon, then the EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM, EF 24-70/4L IS USM, or EF 24-70/2.8L USM II are more likely suspects.

The 18-135 is a jack-of-all-trades kind of lens. Not quite high quality, not quite expensive, not quite a superzoom. It works for a lot of things, quite well, and is definitely an improvement over the 28-135 on image quality and crop focal-length range, but it's still just a kit lens.

[connaughtgreen]

well what can one say you have come up trumps again plenty of sound advice and food for thought. I obviously would consider a camera upgrade even though i enjoy the 1000d im never going to be a camera geek heading onwards to 70 next year i just enjoy snapping. I was brought up on kodak brownie 110mm and 35mm where you waited a few days to see what your handiwork was like. Amazingly i have just upgraded my phone new contract that has more mega pixels than my 1000d and at the flick of my wrist i can take a shot then send the picture through the stratosphere in to another phone or my pc My how times have changed

[Tronhard]

If it helps I have the 18-135 IS STM, the 15-85 IS USM the 17-40IS L and the 24-105L USM. Right... It really depends on what you define as a walk around lens: by which I mean what range do you actually work within. The other MAJOR question is how much do you want to invest?

If you are likely to use a full-frame camera I would say that the 17-40L is the one for wide angle and the 24-105 for a more moderate solution.

If you are sticking to a crop sensor camera, then you need to consider the 15-85 - it's optical qualities have been described as the secret L series lens because of the quality of its images TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE RANGE OF FOCAL LENGHTS. If you are not fussed about wide angle then I would recommend the 18-135 STM version - both versions of the STM version have got good reviews and as a user of the (now) older version I can say both the example I have of this lens provide good quality images.

For those who prefer fixed focal length lenses it generally goes without saying that they should offer better quality results for their specific focal length, but to compare a zoom to a FF lens seems to me like comparing apples to oranges in that the deliver their results in different contexts.

Here is a simple comparison between the lenses I have discussed. You can further expand your search for opinions by looking up major review sites that do not sell product.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/com...tDir=ascending

If you want I can post images of any lens you want in this range, but I won't bore the readers unnecessarily!

[William W]

. . . ... It really depends on what you define as a walk around lens: by which I mean what range do you actually work within. The other MAJOR question is how much do you want to invest? . . .

Terry, you have already these lenses:
"canon 18-55....50mm.....28-80....Tamron 70-300....Sigma 10-20......150-500..."

Those comprise a Focal Length range 10mm to 500mm - which is substantial.

One way of anticipating what FL range you need/want in your new "walk around lens" would be to have a review of the pictures that you've already made and assess what FL range you used the most.

If you want to be pedantic, I understand that there are (freeware) downloadable programmes which can spit out that statistic from a bunch of EXIF Files - but I've never used them - I know I that I use for 'walk about' the 24mm to 135mm range, (on 135 Format Camera) by far and away the most often - 85%~90% of the time.

My 'walk about lens' choices have always reflected that FL Compass. My most recent purchase being the 24 to 105/4L IS because it covers mostly all that range and because I can crop the FoV at FL =105mm, to the FoV of a 135mm lens, with not much loss.

WW

[connaughtgreen]

My my such a lot of info for my senior brain but i suppose thats what i love about this place so much help so many fantastic people all eager to assist.I realise i have a good focal length range but just wanted to get one lens to cover my daily needs on a holiday or just a ramble so i am making way for the 18-135 STM and i will get back to you after i have it.

[connaughtgreen]

my 18-135 STM has arrived not had a walk about with it yet just took a few shots in the garden and can honestly say what a lovely lens it is so thank you for all your advice and opinions once again