Canon 28-135mm vs Canon 24-105mm. is 24-105 worth $600 more? I know the 24-105 is an L and is a better lens, but is it $600 better?
1850441
I used 28-135 for more than 8 years and was happy with it. Recently, I purchased 24-105 and I was very surprised. AF is fast, image is clear, IS is working very good. 24-105 is excellent lens and much better than 28-135.
119684
I have a complete review up of the 18-135 STM comparing it to the old 18-135 with video and photos, this might be helpful to someone determining if it is worth the money http://digital.photorecommendations.com/recs/2012/08/18-135-stm-detailed-review/ In my opinion the 18-135 package is the best value if you want the convenience of one lens.
423082
The 18-105 is definitely the sharper lens. In my opinion, even at F4 throughout the entire range, you get amazing results. The 18-200, like most zooms, you have to really stop it down some to get the best results and the telephoto ends tends to get soft focus. It's a good all-in-one but definitely can notice the difference in performance and image quality especially in lower light situations.
410989
Thanks for the information. I was using a Canon 28-135 IS USM as my walk around travel lens and loved it until it got stolen in an airport! :-( Now I'm in the market for a new lens and I'm leaning towards the Tamron. I've used their lens in my past photography life with my old AE-1 Program and I'd LOVE the 18-270 if I can swing the $$$. I'm hunting eBay as well, as that's where I got my 28-135 and had NO problems with it at all!
1375969
The lens is the same. I would recommend purchasing from Amazon, as there are no significant discounts and Amazon standing behind their products and purchasers, to include no-charge 2 day shipping if a Prime member worth it. By the way, a great lens. If you are a pro then go for it, but the new 24-240 lens at $995 is a great bargain and a great lens covering a 10X magnification, relatively light, and works great on e-mount Sony's. I just got mine and am ecstatic with it.
1907926
For sure, it's a big deal buy the Canon 6D with the 24-105 L IS kit lens.Its a L series that costs about U$800.00 if bought separately.I bought mine with this lens plus a cheap 50mm 1.8.I am very happy with this set. Very very good pictures quality with the 24-105mm.RegardsJosé Geraldo
1150127
i have both of these lenses and i have to say both are extremely sharp even wide open. i've used the 135/2 more often than the 200/2.8 because i mainly used it as portrait and candid pics. i've enjoy both of these lenses personally and really preferred prime lens over zoom.
1703577
Thanks Michael for sharing your experience. I myself ended up buying a 60d with 18-135 lens kit about a week ago from amazon and I am very happy both with the body as well as the Lens. I had a T2i with 18-55mm before this purchase, and I am not a pro but so far i haven't seen any degradation on the image quality between the two lenses. I like the 18-135 for its decent quality and a very practical zoom range. Not to mention that 60D is a far better body than T2i.
2004639
I've tried both and I like the 24-70 far better. It is a sharper, faster lens.
811134
while i have never had the 70-200, i've had other canon lenses, including the red strip 24-105 4L, and other tamron lenses...from my experience this 24-70 will be as sharp or sharper than them all...tho, like all lenses, you should not shoot at full open 2.8 for best sharpness...i shoot at 3.2, and with the image stab i is no problem...and fully open to 24mm the outer portion may be less sharp, but that holds for all wide angle zooms...this is as good as the best, it is among the best.
1917125
I absolutely love the 28-135mm IS f/3.5 lens from Canon. For about $400 +/- you get a moderate zoom telephoto with a 1:1.6 mag aspect on your dSLR about 44mm - 206mm in 35mm terms with an added bonus of macro capability. I use it as a 'walk around lens' and while not the BEST in construction - the optics are sharp, color rendition is super and the IS is a lifesaver when shooting scenes in low light without a tripod or monopod.For wide angle work - I've purchased the SIGMA 17-35mm f/2.8 and found the optics and color rendition above my expectations for a $225 lens. The SIGMA comes with a lens hood and pouch - for which Canon sells as accessories and expensive ones at that. I absolutely love the 28-135mm IS f/3.5 lens from Canon. For about $400 +/- you get a moderate zoom telephoto with a 1:1.6 mag aspect on your dSLR about 44mm - 206mm in 35mm terms with an added bonus of macro capability. I use it as a 'walk around lens' and while not the BEST in construction - the optics are sharp, color rendition is super and the IS is a lifesaver when shooting scenes in low light without a tripod or monopod.For wide angle work - I've purchased the SIGMA 17-35mm f/2.8 and found the optics and color rendition above my expectations for a $225 lens. The SIGMA... » Read More I absolutely love the 28-135mm IS f/3.5 lens from Canon. For about $400 +/- you get a moderate zoom telephoto with a 1:1.6 mag aspect on your dSLR about 44mm - 206mm in 35mm terms with an added bonus of macro capability. I use it as a 'walk around lens' and while not the BEST in construction - the optics are sharp, color rendition is super and the IS is a lifesaver when shooting scenes in low light without a tripod or monopod.For wide angle work - I've purchased the SIGMA 17-35mm f/2.8 and found the optics and color rendition above my expectations for a $225 lens. The SIGMA comes with a lens hood and pouch - for which Canon sells as accessories and expensive ones at that. « Show Less
1192318
I am extremely pleased with my 18-140. I do not own the 18-200, but I have handled it. The 18-140 is a bit lighter, and handles a bit quicker. It is sharper than my 18-105, especially at the wider focal lengths, where most pictures are taken.
2227376
My thought is the 18-200mm lens for this camera. It is the lens I have, and wanted. I know it's physically bigger than the 18-135, but it does alot more, with that extra zoom. (11x vs 7.5x) The 18mm is equiv to a 27mm wide angle lens in 35mm film specs. The 200 gives it the 11x zoom function. A very versital and desirable lens.
1922083
The 50 is probably more often referred to as a "standard" lens and works great. The 35 is slightly wider and often used for portraits of more than just one person (when you need to fit more people in the frame). Keep in mind that if you have a camera with an ASP-C sensor (or a "crop sensor"-- this is the Rebel line of Canon canons as well as the 7D, etc), the 50mm is closer to a (1.6 x 50 =) 80mm due to the smaller sensor and a 35 looks closer to a (35 x 1.6=) 56mm lens. What I would suggest before dropping a lot of money on the 35L or 50L is to see what range you use more or what looks better on your camera. Most Canon cameras come with an 18-55 or 24-105 lens. Zoom that lens to the 35mm mark and use that for a day and see how it works. Then do the same thing with the lens at the 50mm mark. If you find that 50 is too narrow or 35 is too wide, there is no sense in dropping $1000+ on a focal length you aren't likely to use.
1907930
It's an L Series lens that comes with the camera as opposed to being a 'kit lens' and is awesome when combined with the Canon 6D. The 24-100 L IS gives you a great shooting range, has Image Stabilisation which gives you the 'extra stops' in low light and basically a is a great all round lens. So yes, it is very much worth getting with the camera.
1150130
I used to own both these lenses, but sold the 200 f/2.8L. They are very similar lenses. The 200L is, in my opinion, superior if your goal is landscape photography.For all other uses, I'd recommend the 135L. Portraits are easier in small spaces at the shorter focal length. Events are easier since the shorter length and faster aperture equate to much lower-light capability. Ergonomically, the lenses are practically identical. The 200L accepts a tripod ring, which I doubt you'll ever use.Either way, you're not going to make a wrong decision.
766815
Personally I wish I had gotten the 18-135 as the two DA L lenses are pretty poor quality in comparison, and you actually save money on the 18-135.