My two cents (0.01Ls) 'bout 28-135 for portrait work. Before buying EF28-135 I was thinking to buy EF100/2.0 for portrait work. But then I get order to shot small dog, indoors. I have only one flash so I was forced to mix flash and ambient light which means all shots was at f/2.5 and 1/45s with EF50/1.8 lens and ISO 100 film (customer wanted 30x20cm pictures). So what I get?
1. Too close to subject. 2. Super shallow depth of field. 3. 9 of 10 images was ruined because of 2. I talked with some peoples and they said that I have to shot at f/13 or f/16 to get acceptable depth of field. I checked it out -- he was right. So I chose to buy slow zoom lens to get zoom versatility (I'm not professional, but for low level light I still have EF50/1.8) and later invest in wireless flash system (I already own one EX420 -- so buying one EX550 and another EX420 will cost to me 440Ls -- it is about 640$, studio flashes in my country are very expensive and again -- I'm not professional). When shooting people the main thing is to get eyes sharp and ears reasonably sharp so maybe we don't need F/16. So how about 28-105 vs 28-135? I believe it is only money question. Extra 30mm does not make sense. IS? If you can pay twice as much for this feature only -- buy it! If not -- buy 28-105, it's compact, nice lens, I have worked with it some time. 28-135 is really big pig, almost as big as 28-70/2.8 28-135 is a bit expensive to me, my month income is smaller than price of this lens (since getting away from bloody USSR communists my country made big step forward in economics, but not big enough), I will pay for this lens at least next 8 months. Not a big problem. Gunars. * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
