Canon EF 28-105mm or EF 28-135mm IS. Which is better? Hi,Canon EF 28-105mm or EF 28-135mm IS. Which is better to get good quality pictures. Thank you in advance for any suggestions.Jay Canon EF 28-105mm or EF 28-135mm IS. Which is better? Hi,Canon EF 28-105mm or EF 28-135mm IS. Which is better to get good quality pictures. Thank you in advance for any... » Read More Canon EF 28-105mm or EF 28-135mm IS. Which is better? Hi,Canon EF 28-105mm or EF 28-135mm IS. Which is better to get good quality pictures. Thank you in advance for any suggestions.Jay « Show Less
1319189
It comes down to this:Are you willing to pay $100 extra for IS which will give you the ability to take pictures at 2-3 lower stops (f numbers) than usual?
2029245
Hi Pablo, I have a similar camera (and lens set). I have the GF5 with the X series (compact) 14mm-42mm and I recently got the x series 45mm-175mm. After a ton of reading all the reviews and comments and factoring price and everything (for me) I decided this was the best 2nd lens for me. That said, it is no good UNLESS one is 20+ feet away from what you basically want to shoot. When I take a group shot I have to switch back. I will say the 45x175 is a superb lens, but if you were going to mount one and leave the other home, you would really want the 14-140 (IMO). When I chose the 45-175 I figured why get a lens that was already a range of one I had but in practical use I now see the 14mm-140mm There were a few other factors, one was the price was significantly higher (I got my 45-175 for one hundred ninety two using "like new" on warehouse deals) the other was I really wanted a "X" series lens and the 14-140 is a "G" series only. Two other factors were the 14-140 was almost 8 years older and twice as heavy. I have a GF5 and LOVE how with the 45-175 mounted I can hold it like a soda can in one hand when not using it. I am sure the 14-140 is a great lens, and with the GH2 being a much bigger and heavier camera, I am not sure the increase weight would be an issue. Next time I get another lens my quandary may be similar to your, but it would be the 100-300 vs the very useable 14-140. I already get "Wow" comments with the 45-175 mounted on my tiny red GF5 camera. I can only imagine the comments the humongous 100-300 (zoomed out) would get. I do like how the 45-175 it totally internal and am a tad fearful of the 'zooming/slide' tube feature of the 100-300. I know they have to do it, but it's a tad scary. Overall I really think if you are going to REPLACE (meaning sell or no longer have access the 14-42mm lens) you should opt for the 14-140. That way you ONLY change if you want CRAZY zoom potential! Take care!
963337
Outperforms the 70-300 VR in that is can zoom back to 28mm. That is why it is twice the price. It does not produce better images between 70 and 300mm. I would chose the 70-300 for the longest shots, and the 28-300 for shorter. Both lenses are as professional as the person using them, do not be impressed by reviewers waving wads of bills at you, because like a Violin, a Camera/lens is only as good as the user!
1864063
I'm a hobbyist. I'd like to upgrade from the 28-135mm to the 24-105mm, but I'm afraid of spending this much and getting a lens that isn't a "good copy." I'm just not expert enough to know if a lens needs to be recalibrated or something. Is it best for someone like me to buy local and ask the camera store to evaluate the lens sharpness? Or buy from someone like B&H; and ask them to evaluate it before they ship it to me? I resell a lot of lenses, too, and I wouldn't want to resell it some day and have someone complain it wasn't sharp.
468417
Thanks for the info on the e-520 I was thinking about getting a back up camera and was going to get the 520. I will stay with the 510 since it has given me absolutely beautiful pictures. I have the 14-54 on my camera 80 percent of the time and it is a great combo, along with the fl-36 flash. I will be getting the 11-22 zuiko lens next.
1542988
The 70-300 IS is the newest version and according to reviews, it is much better than the 75-300 IS. If you want more info on Canon lens review, go to http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Hope this will help you with your future lens choice. You should really try to get the best lens you can afford to make your 30D shine.
494449
Definitely. The kit lens is adequate if you're a beginner, but the 18-135 is much better in terms of its shutter speed, range and quality of pics. Hope this helps.
2065294
Well at these focal lengths it's all about compression. Either one will do well but the 135 wide open is probably the way to go since you start at f/2 vs f/2.8 for the 200mm. Your bokeh will be really good on either wide open but in reality be better on the 135 since you will be at f/2 as you're picking up a stop or so. If you are only going to use it for portraits and you don't need the reach you should get the 135mm since it is the f/2 golden child greatness of Canon's lens selections and you can take advantage of it with your FF sensor wide open. Here's a video that shows all the aspects of compression. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Fzh9eQDhL4
1150132
135L exceeds the 200L II in almost every respect. Contrast, sharpness, etc. The perspective one achieves with the 135 length is lovely. Rent them both if you're on the fence that much. I purchased the 70-200 F4L IS for event & wedding photography, and eventually sold it for the 200L II; every time I was using the 70-200, I was at the far end, and the prime is sharper, lighter, offers the extra stop (vs. the f4), etc. My 135L has been with me for years, is rarely matched in performance, and would be the last thing to go in my kit.
425390
Depends on what you need it for. The EF version is just as good for all intents and purposes...the extra $400 is for the Image Stabilization. Do you need IS? The main reason for IS is if you also plan on using it as a medium telephoto prime lens (such as for portraits). If so, then yes! I did, and I'm very happy. But if all I needed it for was to take photos of small inanimate objects while using a tripod, then I would have gone with the EF version and saved the $400!
576343
If you are not interested in video, the Canon EOS 50D 15.1MP Digital SLR Camera with EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Standard Zoom Lens is actually the better choice.
1813611
The Canon "18-135" IS STM is a OK to Good lens for Video because of the STM. But for Stills it is just OK. There's not a perfect lens out there. I don't buy kit lenses, cause for a little more $$ you get better lenses. BUT, you have to ask yourself, will you change lenses back and forth ? From long zooms/telephoto primes and back to short/medium zooms or primes ? OR, do you like leaving one lens on, or you just don't have a bunch of lenses to switch back & forth. The Sigma starts at 17mm the Canon at 18mm both have barrel distortion, but from 24mm to 70mm, yes the Sigma is better than the Canon, but the Canon has a longer reach to 135mm. DXO Labs has this new Sigma 17-70 Contemporary lens at almost the same numbers/performance as the $1100 Canon 17-55 f/2.8 ! That's how good this lens is. BUT, how well they do on Video Dslr cameras, I don't know ? Hope this helps.
1936611
The 55-300 obviously has more bang for the buck. Go with the 55-300 for the savings if you don't plan to be on the 300mm end very much. It's best about 270mm. The 70-300mm is better than the 55-300mm on the 300mm end.
693419
No. Look at the end of the lens that is not attached to your camera and it will have writen 72mm for the 28-135mm lens. This number is the size of the filter that you will need for this lens. You can also look up your lens on the canon site and look at the specifications for each canon lens that you own. If you have the same canon 28-135mm lens I own, then you need a 72mm filter.
528383
I have the 70-300 mm and attest that it has good optics and the build quality is excellent. Comparing e two lenses the first observation is they are equal in speed. The 70-300 mm lens will give you further reach than he EF-S lens especially when considering the multiplication factor that comes with EF lenses with a less than full frame sensor camera body. The 70-300 will work out to yield focal lengths of 120- 480 mm and correspondingly it will be of limited use close up where you would prefer a more standard length lens to shoot with but it can be a lense of choice at sporting events or photographing wildlife. Another consideration is your plans for the future. If you are thinking you may some day purchase a full frame sensor camera body then the only option would be the 70-300mm lens. Finally something to consider would be to Google reviews of each lens. There are some very detailed and exacting reviews available for camera bodies and lenses on-line. Hope these initial observations will be of assistance.
405
Thanks everyone for your help. You've explained a lot and it really helps. After your explanations, I looked at my past photos. I'm thinking that maybe the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 will fill my needs. Thanks again.
1771110
Thank you for the information.I have a 10-20mm and 18-55mm at hand. I decided to purchase 50D with a 28-135mm IS lens and 100-300mm. I will appreciate if you can share your suggestion.Thank you and best regards,GO