> Ken,
> I am referring to ordinary tourist type photos, and tripod mounted team
type
> shops, all pictures taken under a variety of situations, the 28-135IS does
> not match the same genre of pictures taken with my 28-80 3.5-4.5USM. When
I
> say do not match, and this is purely my own generalization of looking at
3.5
> x 5 inch photos. The pictures are not as sharp (ie they look a bit fuzzy &
if
> you use a loupe I notice a lack of minute detail which I attribute to the
bit
> fuzzy appearance). The contrast that I refer to is akin to a picture taken
by
> an "L" lens, the colors jump out at you, well they don't even wiggle with
> this one.
> Hey this is my opinion but I have a shoebox (workboots) that is filled
with
> snapshots of a recent visit to Disney that I regret I took only the
28-135IS
> with me.
> I suggest you borrow the lens from someone and look for yourself before
> buying. If you are around RI, please contact me and I'll gladly let you
use
> it.
> Regards,
> George Smith
Well I too have considered buying the EF 28-135 IS lens. Not for the IS
function, but it covers a nice range and reports from 'most' people rate it
as very sharp and contrasty. Photodo tests also show it is much better than
any tests of the 28-80(70) consumer lenses.
This brings up the question - do you have a lemon, possibly a loose
element in that lens? I've read many many good opinions of this lens, yours
is the first I've heard negative about it. I have an older 35-135 which
Photodo rates lower than the 28-135 IS lens, and I consider IT to be quite
sharp, so your comments have really surprised me.
Have you tried looking at the negatives with that loupe? Although you do
seem to have a large selection of 3 by 5 photos there to compare, it's my
experience that one can't really judge a lens by such a print. Have you had
any blowups done? Have you done any real testing - such as both lens on a
tripod, same conditions, same film?
My requirements of sharpness are not as high as some people's. But I
would like something a step up from my 35-135 if I buy a new lens,
especially since the EF 28-135 IS is not a cheap lens, and I likely won't
need the IS function that much.
Now, if they only made a 28-135 L lens, I wouldn't have any further to
look. The 28-105 is considered to be a decent lens, but not a high enough
stepup for me, and at a reduced range, so it's not an option for me. In fact
I tested an EF 28-105 in the store and was dissapointed with it's slow
focusing compared to my 35-135 USM.
Actually, I'm pretty happy with this lens, I just wish it was a bit
faster. I already have the EF 20-35, so I don't miss out on the low end,
except maybe to have to change lenses more.
I was in the store the other day looking at used lenses, and they have
an EF 14mm L lens there I'd love to have. As well as a 28-70 L lens. I just
don't want to live with such a short zoom range though at that price.
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
