Alternative to Canon EF 28-135 IS USM


Status
Not open for further replies.

Terence

Senior Member
Nov 16, 2003
4,751
0
0
I'm a Llama!
#1
Hi All,

Been looking around for a lens to replace my EF 28-105 and was considering the above lens. But there must be some other alternatives to the EF 28-135 out there. I have been getting mixed reviews on this lens, some love it, some hate it...

I intend this to be my main lens and I do use the full focal range for many of my shots. I use a Canon 10D.

Was also looking at the new Sigma 24-135 f/2.8-4.5 IF. Any thoughts on that one or other models you'd recommend?

Thanks
 

mpenza

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2002
12,938
0
0
Singapore
www.instagram.com
#2
Tamron 24-135 is a well-regarded lens in the range. Sigma's one was said to be quite soft from what I read from dpreview.
 

fooey

New Member
Oct 26, 2003
129
0
0
34
Sydney
Visit site
#5
MaGixShOe said:
get the Tamron 24-135

better coverage on 10D and better image quality than 28-135IS and the sigma
price wise? If the tamron 24-135 outclasses the canon then why do some people still buy the canon?
 

Bluestrike

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 17, 2002
4,784
0
0
41
There lor~
bluestrike.clubsnap.org
#6
fooey said:
price wise? If the tamron 24-135 outclasses the canon then why do some people still buy the canon?
One reason could be that CAnon has USM on the len while the Tamron ... well...
hmm...
wellll....
 

wanglk

New Member
Oct 26, 2003
448
1
0
44
Singapore
Visit site
#7
price wise? If the tamron 24-135 outclasses the canon then why do some people still buy the canon?
Well, Canon one got USM and IS which some people think they worth the price.
 

blurblock

Senior Member
May 30, 2003
3,827
0
0
ytphoto.clubsnap.org
#9

Terence

Senior Member
Nov 16, 2003
4,751
0
0
I'm a Llama!
#10
The Tamron 24-135 does have a lot of consistent positive reviews, unlike the Canon 28-135. I think most folks buy the Canon for its name... that "cannot buy third party lenses" syndrome.

Thanks for your contributions everyone.
 

Terence

Senior Member
Nov 16, 2003
4,751
0
0
I'm a Llama!
#12
Thanks again for all your replies.

I originally went and purchased the Canon 28-135. Brought it home and did about 20 test shots to comapre it against my EF 28-105 and 17-40L. My god, the lens was so soft, especially wide open. I couldn't get a sharp image out of it at all in various lighting conditions. I ranked it last amongst the 3 lens I used, really disappointing. Even the 28-105 beat it in terms of overall sharpness, needless to say the 17-40L beat everything else!

I fretted for quite a bit but called the shop to see if they were willing to exchange it for the Tamron 24-135.. they said no problem... but then, had to give up my bargaining rights. So I went and exchanged it for the Tamron (probably paid $50 above market price) and now I'm writing out this note to all of you... it's a wonderful lens indeed. Thanks to the many kind folks who recommended it. The build quality is much better than the EF 28-135 and the sharpness is way above what I could achieve with the Canon under similar conditions. It was more than $200 cheaper too! And with a free hood!

You can add me to the list of satisfied users. I can foresee this being my main lens from now on, I'd readily recommend it to anyone.
 

pcwe68

New Member
Jul 3, 2003
306
0
0
HOME
Visit site
#13
Terence said:
Thanks again for all your replies.

I originally went and purchased the Canon 28-135. Brought it home and did about 20 test shots to comapre it against my EF 28-105 and 17-40L. My god, the lens was so soft, especially wide open. I couldn't get a sharp image out of it at all in various lighting conditions. I ranked it last amongst the 3 lens I used, really disappointing. Even the 28-105 beat it in terms of overall sharpness, needless to say the 17-40L beat everything else!

I fretted for quite a bit but called the shop to see if they were willing to exchange it for the Tamron 24-135.. they said no problem... but then, had to give up my bargaining rights. So I went and exchanged it for the Tamron (probably paid $50 above market price) and now I'm writing out this note to all of you... it's a wonderful lens indeed. Thanks to the many kind folks who recommended it. The build quality is much better than the EF 28-135 and the sharpness is way above what I could achieve with the Canon under similar conditions. It was more than $200 cheaper too! And with a free hood!

You can add me to the list of satisfied users. I can foresee this being my main lens from now on, I'd readily recommend it to anyone.
How does it compare to your canon 28-105? Thanks
 

Terence

Senior Member
Nov 16, 2003
4,751
0
0
I'm a Llama!
#14
I think the 28-105 is still value for money, especially if you can get a second hand set for about $350. It is much lighter and smaller than the Tamron, and the USM is a plus. The Tamron motor can be a tad noisy which may irk certain people.

Focusing on the Canon is also a little quicker. Optics wise, the Tamron beats the Canon, but not by much. The 28-105 does require good light to come up with some stunning shots whereas the Tamron seems to be able to function quite well in most light conditions. Both lenses seems to be sharp throughout the entire focal range, even wide open.

If I didn't have the $ to spend, I'd go for the second hand 28-105. But fork out about $220 more and you'd have yourself the 24-135. I think it's a good investment which will last many years.
 

Oct 30, 2003
67
0
0
#15
how is the build of the tamron 24-135? is it solid ?
Is the auto focus much slower than canon 28-135 ?
how much is it sold here in sg?

and looks like this lens is wider... another plus than canon one

Thanks
 

AntZ

New Member
Jun 13, 2003
282
0
0
Visit site
#18
Yah, I think the best alternative for canon 28-135 is the Tamron 24-135, AF is fast but noisy, and very well built.
 

ivor

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2002
1,369
0
0
SINGAPOUR
Visit site
#19
Sorry, guys... I can't help notice that Tamron 24-135 f/3.5-5.6 seems to be the main subject for this thread.

Does that mean the Sigma 24-135 f/2.8-4.5 IF mentioned in the early part of the thread is not good at all. The rating in Photography Review printed 4 of 5.

http://www.photographyreview.com/PRD_286765_3128crx.aspx

Both the Sigma & Canon have a min focus distance of 50 cm while Tamron has a min focus distance of 40 cm.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom