Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS - Any Good?

TheCaveman

Hi there.

A while ago, I got some great advice here, as I was going to get my wife the Canon 40D for her birthday.

Well, since than, she has decided, the 40D, although brilliant, is just too big for her.

AS she will be doing a lot of walking around, nature/outdoor shots.

So she decided to get the 400D instead, and we are going to the states, so we will pick it up from BH photo.

So we are getting:

400D with kit lens, Canon 18-55mm EF-S Lens

Zoon Lens: $550
Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS Image Stabilizer USM Auto focus Lens

Wide Angle Lens: $400
Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Image Stabilizer USM Auto focus Lens


My question is, the Wide Angle lens, is it any good, or what alternative do you suggest?

Thank you.

leohoju

While I can't offer any specific advice on the lens, it might be worth your while checking out this link for reviews from other users. The lens seems to get a pretty good rating there by the way.

PaulieC

I had the lens and it's good enough I guess - nothing out of this world. One thing though, it's 28mm at the wide end, which on a 400D would be the equivalent of around 45mm, which isn't very wide at all and you may need to get something wider again depending on what you would normally shoot.
You're probably better off going for the 400D body only and then getting the Canon 17-85 IS or Sigma 17-70 to go along with the 70-300 IS

5uspect

Ahem!

PaulieC

it might be cheap in Argos, but that doesn't really help when you're trying to shoot something and you can't fit it in because the lens isn't wide enough!!

5uspect

My post wasn't aimed at you Cambo! It was just for the OP to consider. I do agree that 28mm isn't really wide at all but since its cheap it would be a good general walkaround lens.

PaulieC

5uspect wrote: »

My post wasn't aimed at you Cambo!

oh I know it wasn't! I was probably a bit sharp in my reply, it was unintentional. I think there's a reason that lens is so cheap and it's because it's a very odd range to have on a crop sensor DSLR, it has effectively been replaced by the 17-85 EFS lens

deRanged

to echo what cambo_gueno said, I've got the 28-135 on my 400D - it's handy out as a walk around but it's certainly not very wide. If you really want a wide angle I'd look elsewhere.

TheCaveman

So is the Canon 17-85 IS a better replacement?

Or can we all agree to disagree?

PaulieC

well it's better in the sense that it's about optically equal to the 28-135, it gives you the equivilent range on a 400D and it complements the 70-300IS well in terms of range and quality.
I think it makes more sense that the kit lens and the 28-135

mathias

I have the 28 -135 , good lens , but as posted its not wide on a digital with an aps size sensor , not wide at all , and if its being bought for that you will be disappointed.

Its best on a full frame or a film camera , for the 400D or any aps size sensor you need to be starting at 17mm for wide.

5uspect

cambo_gueno wrote: »

oh I know it wasn't! I was probably a bit sharp in my reply, it was unintentional. I think there's a reason that lens is so cheap and it's because it's a very odd range to have on a crop sensor DSLR, it has effectively been replaced by the 17-85 EFS lens

Ah no harm done


If you want wide get the 17-85.
Its EF-S tho...