Canon 28-135 IS.... info !!!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by advid, Dec 10, 2004.

  1. advid

    advid Guest

    I've just brought from Ebay a 75-300 IS and a 28-135 IS... (from
    different sellers).....

    The 75-300 (purchased a few weeks ago) is very good and already i've
    taken some good bird/wildlife pics - and that's saying something in the
    goold old 'grey days' in the UK at this time of year... The IS works
    really well and the lens quality seems to be pretty sharp even at
    300mmm. I'm not expecting 'L' quality but prints look good after a bit
    of Photoshop'ing.

    The 28-135 on the other hand seems to be a lot slower to focus/lock on
    to a subject and to my eyes is nowhere hear as sharp as the 75-300. A
    higher percentage of shots do not even seem to be focussed
    correctly....

    Does it look like I've got a bad lens ?? Is there any specific test I
    can carry out (apart from actually going out a taking photos) that will
    tell me if I've got a bad one....

    The 28-135 IS was purchased in order to replace my old Canon 35-135 (no
    IS) and so far it really doesn't 'cut the mustard'...

    How to I solve this ?? (sell and buy another ????)


    The 28-135 IS lens seems to be one of the most popular amongst Canon
    users and gets good vibes from most.... Has anyone on here had a BAD
    experience with the 28-135 lens that doesn't quite live up to it's
    expectations ????
     
    advid, Dec 10, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. advid

    Angela Guest

    "advid" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > The 28-135 IS lens seems to be one of the most popular amongst Canon
    > users and gets good vibes from most.... Has anyone on here had a BAD
    > experience with the 28-135 lens that doesn't quite live up to it's
    > expectations ????
    >

    I am interested in responses as I was just about to order the same lens
    combination. Which Ebay seeller did you use? I was planning to use
    7dayshop with both of them at £299 each. I would be interested to know how
    much you paid.

    Angela
     
    Angela, Dec 10, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. advid

    Phil Wheeler Guest

    advid wrote:

    > I've just brought from Ebay a 75-300 IS and a 28-135 IS... (from
    > different sellers).....
    >
    > The 75-300 (purchased a few weeks ago) is very good and already i've
    > taken some good bird/wildlife pics - and that's saying something in the
    > goold old 'grey days' in the UK at this time of year... The IS works
    > really well and the lens quality seems to be pretty sharp even at
    > 300mmm. I'm not expecting 'L' quality but prints look good after a bit
    > of Photoshop'ing.
    >
    > The 28-135 on the other hand seems to be a lot slower to focus/lock on
    > to a subject and to my eyes is nowhere hear as sharp as the 75-300. A
    > higher percentage of shots do not even seem to be focussed
    > correctly....
    >


    They are both of the same era design-wise, two of Canon's earlier IS
    lenses. I would expect them to both focus well but not so quickly as
    newer designs

    My 28-135IS has been fine and the lens reviews agree with that. A
    friend is on #3 (he wore out two from usage!) and says they have all
    been fine -- and he has three L lenses and high standards.

    I would question whether you got a good sample.

    Phil
     
    Phil Wheeler, Dec 10, 2004
    #3
  4. advid

    Jon Pike Guest

    "advid" <> wrote in news:1102689094.218288.242910
    @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

    > I've just brought from Ebay a 75-300 IS and a 28-135 IS... (from
    > different sellers).....


    When you buy off ebay, you get what you pay for :/

    > The 28-135 on the other hand seems to be a lot slower to focus/lock on
    > to a subject and to my eyes is nowhere hear as sharp as the 75-300. A
    > higher percentage of shots do not even seem to be focussed
    > correctly....
    >
    > Does it look like I've got a bad lens ?? Is there any specific test I
    > can carry out (apart from actually going out a taking photos) that will
    > tell me if I've got a bad one....


    There are tests you can conduct that will tell you if the lense is bad.
    However, they require taking pictures.

    > The 28-135 IS was purchased in order to replace my old Canon 35-135 (no
    > IS) and so far it really doesn't 'cut the mustard'...
    >
    > How to I solve this ?? (sell and buy another ????)


    If you know that it's faulty, it would be unethical of you to try and sell
    it.

    --
    http://www.neopets.com/refer.phtml?username=moosespet
     
    Jon Pike, Dec 10, 2004
    #4
  5. advid

    Jon Pike Guest

    "Angela" <> wrote in
    news:cpccru$3aj$2surf.net:

    >
    > "advid" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> The 28-135 IS lens seems to be one of the most popular amongst Canon
    >> users and gets good vibes from most.... Has anyone on here had a BAD
    >> experience with the 28-135 lens that doesn't quite live up to it's
    >> expectations ????
    >>

    > I am interested in responses as I was just about to order the same
    > lens combination. Which Ebay seeller did you use? I was planning to
    > use 7dayshop with both of them at £299 each. I would be interested to
    > know how much you paid.


    You'd be paying more than retail if you paid that for the 28-135.

    www.thecamerastore.com
    Canon EF 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM
    Your price: $689.95 (CAD)

    299£ = 702.65 CAD.

    You're better off buying from a store, instead of ebay.

    --
    http://www.neopets.com/refer.phtml?username=moosespet
     
    Jon Pike, Dec 10, 2004
    #5
  6. advid

    Eric Gill Guest

    "advid" <> wrote in news:1102689094.218288.242910
    @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

    >
    > The 28-135 IS lens seems to be one of the most popular amongst Canon
    > users and gets good vibes from most.... Has anyone on here had a BAD
    > experience with the 28-135 lens that doesn't quite live up to it's
    > expectations ????


    No. Your lens is damaged. The 28-135 is no "L", but it's a good, solid
    performer and it's main weaknesses are a slight edge dropoff and slightly
    flat color. The 75-300IS is not even vaguely in the same league; it's
    godawfully slow and soft through it's entire throw. If it's outperforming
    the 28-135, something is seriously screwy.
     
    Eric Gill, Dec 10, 2004
    #6
  7. advid

    Phil Wheeler Guest

    Jon Pike wrote:


    > There are tests you can conduct that will tell you if the lense is bad.
    > However, they require taking pictures.
    >


    That seems like a narrow view <grin>

    Phil
     
    Phil Wheeler, Dec 10, 2004
    #7
  8. advid

    Angela Guest

    "Jon Pike" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns95BB52813AEFBLessThanPerfectInc@24.71.223.159...
    > "Angela" <> wrote in
    > news:cpccru$3aj$2surf.net:
    >
    > You'd be paying more than retail if you paid that for the 28-135.
    >
    > www.thecamerastore.com
    > Canon EF 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM
    > Your price: $689.95 (CAD)
    >
    > 299£ = 702.65 CAD.
    >
    > You're better off buying from a store, instead of ebay.


    What you say may be true in Canada but not in the UK. For example the
    largest dealer in the UK sells the 28-135 IS for £415 (975 CAD)and you won't
    find it much cheaper elsewhere in the UK, so £299 is pretty cheap for us.
    sure we could import one from the US but then we have to pay 25% import duty
    and sales tax plus you lose any warranty. We are well and truely fleeced
    over here
     
    Angela, Dec 10, 2004
    #8
  9. advid

    RustY© Guest

    "advid" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > The 28-135 on the other hand seems to be a lot slower to focus/lock on
    > to a subject and to my eyes is nowhere hear as sharp as the 75-300. A
    > higher percentage of shots do not even seem to be focussed


    I think you have answered that with your last sentence. They are either in
    focus or not but the different angle gives a totally different impression
    and that is what your problem is. With a telephoto lens the backround
    appears very different from a wide angle shot and can make the subject look
    'sharper'.
    --
    For Welsh Military Flying visit .......
    www.groups.yahoo.com/group/V-A-S/
     
    RustY©, Dec 10, 2004
    #9
  10. advid

    Guest

    I have the 28-135mm IS lens as well as 4 L lens. I have been really
    surprised at the images I have taken with it. It is sharp, focus is
    fast, and the color is very good. I bought it when I bought my 10D and
    I use it for a general purpose walk around lens. I bought it with the
    intention of trying it and if I didn't like it I was going to sell it.
    I bought it used and figured I could break even. I'm keeping it for the
    use I bought it for. A 46-212mm IS lens for general walk around
    photography. I'd say that you have a faulty lens.

    Art
     
    , Dec 10, 2004
    #10
  11. advid

    Mark² Guest

    "advid" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I've just brought from Ebay a 75-300 IS and a 28-135 IS... (from
    > different sellers).....
    >
    > The 75-300 (purchased a few weeks ago) is very good and already i've
    > taken some good bird/wildlife pics - and that's saying something in the
    > goold old 'grey days' in the UK at this time of year... The IS works
    > really well and the lens quality seems to be pretty sharp even at
    > 300mmm. I'm not expecting 'L' quality but prints look good after a bit
    > of Photoshop'ing.
    >
    > The 28-135 on the other hand seems to be a lot slower to focus/lock on
    > to a subject and to my eyes is nowhere hear as sharp as the 75-300. A
    > higher percentage of shots do not even seem to be focussed
    > correctly....
    >
    > Does it look like I've got a bad lens ?? Is there any specific test I
    > can carry out (apart from actually going out a taking photos) that will
    > tell me if I've got a bad one....
    >
    > The 28-135 IS was purchased in order to replace my old Canon 35-135 (no
    > IS) and so far it really doesn't 'cut the mustard'...
    >
    > How to I solve this ?? (sell and buy another ????)
    >
    >
    > The 28-135 IS lens seems to be one of the most popular amongst Canon
    > users and gets good vibes from most.... Has anyone on here had a BAD
    > experience with the 28-135 lens that doesn't quite live up to it's
    > expectations ????


    If your 28-135 is worse than your 75-300, then there is DEFINITELY something
    wrong with it. I've owned/used that lens since it first was released and
    it's an excellent lens. I own and use three L-series lenses, so I do
    appreciate a good lens, and I can tell you that for a non-L, the 28-135 is
    very very good.

    If you're talking about the 75-300 IS version...I've owned that lens too,
    though I gave it to my father when I bought the 100-400 IS L. 75-300
    performance should be WELL BELOW the 28-135.

    -Mark

    -Mark
     
    Mark², Dec 10, 2004
    #11
  12. advid

    Skip M Guest

    "Phil Wheeler" <> wrote in message
    news:v%iud.12913$...
    >
    >
    > Jon Pike wrote:
    >
    >
    >> There are tests you can conduct that will tell you if the lense is bad.
    >> However, they require taking pictures.
    >>

    >
    > That seems like a narrow view <grin>
    >
    > Phil
    >

    But an ethical one! <G>

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Dec 10, 2004
    #12
  13. advid

    Skip M Guest

    "advid" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I've just brought from Ebay a 75-300 IS and a 28-135 IS... (from
    > different sellers).....
    >
    > The 75-300 (purchased a few weeks ago) is very good and already i've
    > taken some good bird/wildlife pics - and that's saying something in the
    > goold old 'grey days' in the UK at this time of year... The IS works
    > really well and the lens quality seems to be pretty sharp even at
    > 300mmm. I'm not expecting 'L' quality but prints look good after a bit
    > of Photoshop'ing.
    >
    > The 28-135 on the other hand seems to be a lot slower to focus/lock on
    > to a subject and to my eyes is nowhere hear as sharp as the 75-300. A
    > higher percentage of shots do not even seem to be focussed
    > correctly....
    >
    > Does it look like I've got a bad lens ?? Is there any specific test I
    > can carry out (apart from actually going out a taking photos) that will
    > tell me if I've got a bad one....
    >
    > The 28-135 IS was purchased in order to replace my old Canon 35-135 (no
    > IS) and so far it really doesn't 'cut the mustard'...
    >
    > How to I solve this ?? (sell and buy another ????)
    >
    >
    > The 28-135 IS lens seems to be one of the most popular amongst Canon
    > users and gets good vibes from most.... Has anyone on here had a BAD
    > experience with the 28-135 lens that doesn't quite live up to it's
    > expectations ????
    >

    The 28-135 has "true" ring USM, the 75-300 has micromotor USM, which is
    marginally slower, as a type, and much slower in these examples. According
    to lens tests, and my own experience, the 28-135 is sharper throughout its
    range than the 75-300.
    Contact the seller and tell him it is faulty. If it was insured, hit up the
    PO for damages, either for repair or replacement. You did insure it, didn't
    you?

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Dec 10, 2004
    #13
  14. advid

    Guest

    I originally bought these two lenses when I bought my 10D in July 2003.
    I find the results just the opposite of what you do in that the 28-135
    IS gives excellent results, AF is pretty quick and have no problems
    getting very sharp photos from it. On the other hand I didn't care for
    the 75-300 IS because it was noticably not as good, in all regards
    (still a decent lens for the price, don't misunderstand). I have since
    sold the 75-300 IS and replaced it with the 100-400 L IS (no
    comparison!!! not even close!)

    I use my 28-135 all the time and is almost always on my Elan 7NE as the
    primary lens (I have trouble taking the 100-400 off my 10D :)

    I'm guessing you may have gotten a bad or abused/worn out lens and as
    you and others mentioned, the 28-135 IS gets great reviews ... not an
    "L" lens but still a very, very good lens.
     
    , Dec 10, 2004
    #14
  15. advid

    Lansbury Guest

    On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:23:42 -0000, "Angela"
    <> wrote:

    >sure we could import one from the US but then we have to pay 25% import duty
    >and sales tax plus you lose any warranty.


    don't you mean 2.5% duty?. The warranty on Canon lenses is an international
    one so if purchased in the US is valid in the UK. I have 3 which came that
    way.

    -
    Lansbury
    www.uk-air.net
    FAQs for the alt.travel.uk.air newsgroup
     
    Lansbury, Dec 11, 2004
    #15
  16. advid

    Lansbury Guest

    On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:23:42 -0000, "Angela"
    <> wrote:

    >but then we have to pay 25% import duty


    just got the book out and looked and duty on camera lenses from the USA is
    4.2%

    -
    Lansbury
    www.uk-air.net
    FAQs for the alt.travel.uk.air newsgroup
     
    Lansbury, Dec 11, 2004
    #16
  17. advid

    advid Guest

    .......I've just read a review of the 28-135 on here

    http://mankman.com/Lens_Tests/lens_framework.html

    it's refers to the lens being a bit slow and underexposing on the D60
    (and probably the D30 as well).... That's EXACTLY what I'm using it
    on....(I've got a D30 and D60) My D60 is my main camera (can't afford
    to upgrade yet!)....

    The reviewer says it 'springs to life' on a 10D (and probably even
    better on a 20D).... Could this be the reason why my lens seems to be a
    bit 'iffy'...???

    I've just taken a few outdoor flower pics on a reasonably bright day
    and after unsharp masking in PShop there is quite good
    quality/sharpness...

    It just doesn't seem to like 'grey days' in the UK.... slows it right
    down and very flat pics - which is definately what I've been getting...

    Have any users on here gone from the D30/D60 to the 10D/20D with this
    lens and noticed such an improvement ?
    Would an upgrade to a 10D or 20D really make all that difference ??
     
    advid, Dec 11, 2004
    #17
  18. advid

    Jules Guest

    Hello Lansbury

    What commodity code do you have for digital camera lenses in your book? I
    make lenses out to be 6.7% duty (Commodity Code - 9002110090).

    Which one of us is wrong?



    "Lansbury" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:23:42 -0000, "Angela"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >but then we have to pay 25% import duty

    >
    > just got the book out and looked and duty on camera lenses from the USA is
    > 4.2%
    >
    > -
    > Lansbury
    > www.uk-air.net
    > FAQs for the alt.travel.uk.air newsgroup
     
    Jules, Dec 11, 2004
    #18
  19. advid

    Angela Guest

    "Lansbury" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:23:42 -0000, "Angela"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>but then we have to pay 25% import duty

    >
    > just got the book out and looked and duty on camera lenses from the USA is
    > 4.2%


    Then add 17.5% VAt on top of that and you're up to 22% then add the £5-15
    handling charge for getting it through customs that (royal Mail at £5 and
    Fedex at £15)...........starts looking like 25% to me (I did say import tax
    and sales tax)
     
    Angela, Dec 11, 2004
    #19
  20. advid

    Annika1980 Guest

    >From: "advid"

    >Have any users on here gone from the D30/D60 to the 10D/20D with this
    >lens and noticed such an improvement ?


    Fraid not. My 28-135 IS works equally well on both my D60 and my 20D.

    >The reviewer says it 'springs to life' on a 10D (and probably even
    >better on a 20D).... Could this be the reason why my lens seems to be a
    >bit 'iffy'...???


    Obviously, the 20D attains focus faster with ANY lens so any differences you
    see will be camera-specific and not lens-specific.

    If you expect the 28-135 to focus as quickly as one of the expensive "L" lenses
    it won't. If you expect sharp pics out of it and great IS perfomance, you'll
    get it.
     
    Annika1980, Dec 11, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Frank B

    Canon 10D Full Res 24-85, 28-135 IS Samples

    Frank B, Jul 15, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    764
    Frank B
    Jul 17, 2003
  2. Lionel
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    454
    Lionel
    Sep 5, 2003
  3. David Littlewood
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    408
    David Littlewood
    Sep 5, 2003
  4. Marcel Titus

    10D and Canon EF 28-135 IS USM -any good?

    Marcel Titus, Sep 25, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    718
    FOR7b
    Sep 28, 2003
  5. Derek Fountain

    Canon 28-105 vs Canon 28-135 lenses

    Derek Fountain, Mar 10, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    544
    David Griffin
    Mar 12, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page