Reviews and Problems with Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Showing 1-10 of 32
Value for money 4
Overall quality 4
Mark McMillan, Canon
29 May 2014
Conclusion: When I purchased my EOS 7D, I chose a package which contained the EF 28-135 IS USM lens because I figured it would be better than the EF-S option and because I wanted to be able to use it when I upgrade to a full-frame camera. Fortunately, it wasn't too costly a mistake. The good: The image stablization system works very well. Focus speed, as a result of the USM, is also fast and reliably accurate. The large-ish rubber zooming grip is also quite comfortable to use.
Excerpt: I bought this lens to match up with my Panasonic AC130 for 2 camera shoots. I can match it fine but the images are not sharp. I "punched in" with the magnify button endless amounts of time on my 6D and seemed to have it in focus, but it never really was even at f9. I guess that is why they call it a kit lens. I am disappointed and plan on sending it back before the 30 days is up and get the Tamron 24-70 2.8 vc.
Conclusion: Very poor quality in the range between 80 and 135mm, even for regular printouts. Very sensitive to sand and dust, barrel shaky. 24-105 L is so much better. If anyone considers buying a DSLR for reasons of image quality (over choosing a analogue or bridge camera), this lens is inadequate for the purpose. Sold mine after two years of disappointments on my first DSLR, the 20D.
Excerpt: This was the kit lens with my 50D. I hated using this lens. While its properly F2.5 at 28mm, by the time you extend it to 35mm or so, its F5.6. Way too slow for 99% of my shooting. Available light shooting was acceptable only on bright sunny days, which is not when you get flattering light for your subjects. On a crop sensor body, 28mm is not wide angle, its very close to the "normal" 50mm on a full frame camera. This is too long and too slow (aperture) for my tastes.
Excerpt: Have to use this lens with caution. It does not produce results like the "L" series lenses. It has a wonderful range of focal lenths, but it is a little bit of a compromise if you want sharp, sharp images. Great running around lens, but if you are serious about photography, and image quality. Look to spend a bit more money.
Is there a chance that I was "Duped"? I think it's quite possible!
1 February 2012
Summary: I purchased the lens believing that it was fast focusing and that it was equipped with the nearly silent, "Ring type" USM adjustment;("Can only be heard by dogs and bats") according to the reviews. The lens that I have in my possesion though, is neither fast focusing nor quiet in it's operation. In addition, there is absolutely no indication that the "Image Stabilizer" is functional. The lens is particularly noisy and slow focusing. A total disappointment!
Excerpt: Ok to replace a 18-55mm kit lens, but that is about it. The Zoom Ring is loose, and continuous Lens Creep is a Nuisance. The Barrel of the lens shows no quality, and in time will loosen even more, which will allow dirt and dust to get inside the elements. If you own a Rebel, or a 20D, 30D, 40D, 50D or 60D camera, do yourself a favor and look at the EFS Lenses. If you own a Full Frame Camera, go with an "L" Lens.
Pros: Consistent Output, Easily Interchangeable, Priced Right
Summary: It's not bad....but it's not great either, especially if you try and compare it to far more expensive lenses (which for some reason a lot of the reviewers here seem to be doing). But this is not an expensive lens. It looks, feels and performs like a reasonable walkabout lens. If you're a professional photographer then you won't want one. If you're solely taking landscape photo's then you won't want one. If you spend your time on portrait photos, you won't want one.
Pros: Price / performance ratio is pretty good, IS works well
Cons: AF can be a bit flaky, One-lens-fits-all design results in compromises that won't suit everybody