Home  »  Photography   »   Canon 28 135mm Vs 18 135mm

Canon 28 135mm Vs 18 135mm

By | 17/10/2022


connaughtgreen is offline

Canon 18-135 or 28-135?

Merely need to know your thoughts on these 2 lens Have to be honest i have heard a few not very nice things about them.

The reason i was interested is that it appears i can only nearly get all i want from either of these lenses.

There are always a big amount of both for sale making me wonder if its a viable purchase.

Now i know i tin can get a expert feed back from y’all on here so give it your all please…..

Many Thank you


Geoff F is offline

re: Catechism xviii-135 or 28-135?

The eighteen-135 is a newer version. I one time had the 28-135 and found it to be a reasonable full general purpose lens. Yes, you tin can do ameliorate at twice the price, or fifty-fifty more, but I found the 28-135 to exist OK as a mid budget lens. There are certainly a lot of worse options.

These were, and probably nonetheless are, sometimes offered as ‘kit lens’ with a decent torso so that may explicate why people sell them on when they upgrade to a more than expensive lens.

ps. I upgraded to the Canon 24-105 but didn’t like it for various reasons so I now use the Tamron 24-seventy.


chauncey is offline

re: Catechism 18-135 or 28-135?

IMHO…those general purpose lenses pale in comparison to primes if you’re in it for the long haul.


rpcrowe is offline

rpcrowe's Avatar

re: Catechism 18-135 or 28-135?

Yep, primes are often a reasonably priced option to become better IQ than these lenses will provide.

However, don’t sell the 28-135mm IS lens too short. I cannot speak of the 18-135mm since I never used one..

I used the 28-135mm lens for my canis familiaris portraits early on with various crop frame cameras from the 10D to the 40D. The quality was quite decent…

60mm @ f/eight – crop camera
Canon  18-135 or 28-135?

65mm @ f/8 – crop camera
Canon  18-135 or 28-135?

51mm @ f/16 – crop camera
Canon  18-135 or 28-135?

I did not own a total frame photographic camera when I was shooting with the 28-135mm lens but, it is an EF lens while the xviii-135mm is an EFS lens. So a photographer could use the 28-135mm lens on a full frame camera. In fact it was designed for 35mm movie cameras which, of course, were full frame.

The 28-135mm suffers a bit when at its maximum focal length. I purchased a used 135mm f/2.viii SF lens to accept care of that selection. Without dialing in whatsoever softness, the lens is quite good from f/4 through f/eleven. I paid less than $100 USD for that lens (used) and still have it (although information technology has been gathering dust).

I now shoot with the 70-200mm f/4L IS lens which is just a wonderful piece of glass!

Concluding edited by rpcrowe; 4th June 2016 at
09:01 PM.


connaughtgreen is offline

re: Canon eighteen-135 or 28-135?

chauncey i wasnt aware that these two were general purpose release cameras i was looking for a nice walk around blazon of camera so i can accept a range of pictures and these seem to fit the beak


William W is online now

William W's Avatar

Re: Catechism 18-135 or 28-135?

What camera(s) will you be using?

What lens(es) practise y’all have already?


Final edited past William W; 4th June 2016 at
11:46 PM.


connaughtgreen is offline

Re: Canon 18-135 or 28-135?

eos 1000d….catechism 18-55….50mm…..28-80….Tamron seventy-300….Sigma 10-twenty……150-500…


connaughtgreen is offline

Re: Canon 18-135 or 28-135?

Originally Posted by
View Post

eos 1000d….canon 18-55….50mm…..28-fourscore….Tamron 70-300….Sigma x-20……150-500…

I forgot to say not that it brand any difference apart from the Tamron which came with the camera all the others were given or just passed to me


connaughtgreen is offline

Re: Canon 18-135 or 28-135?

Geoff F so is the Tamron 24-lxx your walk around camera so if not what do y’all use Many Thanks


Geoff F is offline

Re: Canon 18-135 or 28-135?

Yes, it is my standby lens for smaller size work. Also have the Canon 70-200 which is an excellent mid length zoom which compliments the Tamron.

At one time I tended to regard Tamron as a manufacturer of upkeep lenses only recently they accept been producing some high quality equipment. Before buy, I checked a few reviews where they were rated slightly above the considerably more expensive Catechism alternatives.

Primes are a skillful alternative if you do that sort of photography where the advice had always been to ‘zoom with your anxiety’. But for me, I simply bear witness a cliff top edge and say ‘after you then’.


William W is online now

William W's Avatar

Re: Catechism 18-135 or 28-135?

Thanks for answering the questions.

I remember the EF-S18-135mm f/3.5-five.six IS (2009 Outcome) would be the improve choice of the two for a ‘one solution walk around lens’ to be used on your EOS 1000D.

Choosing between those ii lenses: both have IS (but the 28 to 135 is really ‘sometime IS’); both are about the same aperture through their zoom compass: merely the 18 to 135 is (noticeably) much wider: and the (demand of a chip more) wide end is arguably often used often wanted in a ‘walk-about’ lens.

Don’t know why (or where) you lot’d “hear bad things” about the EF-S18-135mm f/3.5-5.half dozen IS – unless it is the tyre kicking brigade who are intrinsically opposed to any “kit lens”.

EF-S18-135mm f/three.5-5.vi IS is mainly an hard plastic build, pretty quick (and accurate) auto focus; very quite abrupt at F/vii.1 through to F/11 and certainly not “bad” wide open.

Information technology is about ten years younger than the EF 28 to 135 and its IS is three or 4 iterations avant-garde; the 18 to 135 has circular blades; information technology feels very lite and would brand a good “1 lens walk around’ mate for your 1000D – the main blueprint purpose of the lens is ‘walk around’ for an APS-C camera.


Really there’south little comparing between the older 1990’s EF Kit Lenses and the newer 2000’s EF-S Difficult Plastic Kit Lenses. The newer models but foam the older result on all accounts: including the fact that the EF28-135mm f/3.5-five.half dozen IS USM (1998 issue), is no longer supported.


If you are using mainly Daylight, or Flash, so the ISO chapters of the 1000D volition allow (mostly) your lenses to be used at a reasonable mid aperture.


If your type of Photography dictates low low-cal work, or you seek some other specialist field of Photography, like Macro work or specialist Portraiture (only ii of many examples) and then it would probably be ameliorate to re assess your whole kit and consider upgrading the Camera.

It is unclear if you utilise (or exercise not employ) all the other lenses, (and I notation that all except one were gratuitous) – but at that place’s one assumption which poses a question in my mind – if you brand a lot of apply of the Sigma 150 to 500, so it’due south likely that an upgrade of the photographic camera body would exist of substantial do good (concerning Higher Quality Loftier ISO and faster/authentic AF).


Perchance y’all’re at the crossroad in your Photography Journey and, with the experience at present of “doing Photography’ for a few years – you are mostly thinking
“what practice I do with this kit that mainly has come up in dribs and drabs to me?’.

Maybe it is fourth dimension that yous purposefully cull a new kit with some defined outcomes in listen: if that is the case then my advice is to consider your whole kit and ask a different question beginning with outline the type of Photography in which yous are interested and every bit a result consider shedding what you exercise non require and buying gear that is more than tailored and more than modern and better suited to your needs and wants.


(meant to mention that I’ve used the EF-Due south 18 to 135 – quite a lot – and I still have the original incantation of the 28 to 135 being the 35 to 135 – but I don’t think I have ever used the 28 to 135 – certainly I, nor the studio, has never owned ane – only equally mentioned it is quite an old lens.)

Last edited by William W; 6th June 2016 at
01:xvi AM.


rpcrowe is offline

rpcrowe's Avatar

Re: Canon 18-135 or 28-135?

“merely I don’t remember I have ever used the 28 to 135 – certainly I, nor the studio, has never owned one – but as mentioned it is quite an old lens.”

Yep, quite an oldie. The EF 28-135mm f/3.five-5.6 IS was the beginning Image Stabilized lens put out by Catechism… It was introduced along with the 50mm f/i.8 Mark I (which wasn’t called a Mark I until the Mark Ii came forth) and the very unusual EF 135mm f/2.eight SF (for soft focus) lens. I have all three of these lenses in my drove and occasionally use them. But, they certainly don’t number among my become-to lenses for serious work…


inkista is offline

inkista's Avatar

Re: Catechism 18-135 or 28-135?

The eighteen-135 STM is an updated lens that more than or less replaced the 28-135 equally a mid-grade kit lens for some prosumer bodies. The 18-28 mm range definitely is more meaningful for a crop shooter. Yet, information technology’s still a consumer/midgrade lens, and it overlaps with your 28-lxxx and eighteen-55.

If you lot want to stick with a crop body, so I’d actually say supervene upon the 18-55/28-135 with an EF-S 15-85 IS USM or the EF-S 17-55/two.8 USM instead, if you want a higher-quality walkaround zoom, or the EF-Southward 18-200 IS if what you actually want is a superzoom.

If you lot plan on moving to total frame relatively soon, so the EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM, EF 24-70/4L IS USM, or EF 24-70/2.8L USM 2 are more likely suspects.

The 18-135 is a jack-of-all-trades kind of lens. Not quite loftier quality, not quite expensive, non quite a superzoom. Information technology works for a lot of things, quite well, and is definitely an improvement over the 28-135 on prototype quality and crop focal-length range, but it’s still only a kit lens.


connaughtgreen is offline

Re: Canon 18-135 or 28-135?

well what can 1 say yous accept come up up trumps again plenty of sound advice and nutrient for thought. I obviously would consider a camera upgrade fifty-fifty though i savor the 1000d im never going to be a camera geek heading onwards to 70 adjacent yr i just enjoy snapping. I was brought up on kodak brownie 110mm and 35mm where you waited a few days to see what your handiwork was like. Amazingly i take just upgraded my phone new contract that has more mega pixels than my 1000d and at the flick of my wrist i can have a shot so transport the moving-picture show through the stratosphere in to another phone or my pc My how times have changed


Tronhard is offline

Tronhard's Avatar

Re: Canon 18-135 or 28-135?

If information technology helps I take the 18-135 IS STM, the 15-85 IS USM the 17-40IS L and the 24-105L USM. Correct… It actually depends on what yous define as a walk effectually lens: past which I hateful what range do yous actually work within. The other MAJOR question is how much do you desire to invest?

If you are likely to use a full-frame camera I would say that the 17-40L is the i for broad bending and the 24-105 for a more moderate solution.

If yous are sticking to a ingather sensor camera, then you need to consider the 15-85 – it’southward optical qualities have been described as the secret L series lens because of the quality of its images TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE RANGE OF FOCAL LENGHTS. If you are not fussed about wide bending then I would recommend the 18-135 STM version – both versions of the STM version have got good reviews and as a user of the (now) older version I tin can say both the example I have of this lens provide good quality images.

For those who prefer stock-still focal length lenses it by and large goes without saying that they should offer better quality results for their specific focal length, but to compare a zoom to a FF lens seems to me like comparing apples to oranges in that the evangelize their results in different contexts.

Hither is a elementary comparison between the lenses I have discussed. You can further expand your search for opinions by looking up major review sites that exercise not sell product.

http://world wide web.dpreview.com/products/com…tDir=ascending

If you want I can postal service images of any lens yous want in this range, but I won’t bore the readers unnecessarily!


William W is online now

William W's Avatar

Re: Canon 18-135 or 28-135?

Originally Posted past
View Post

. . . … It really

depends on what you ascertain as a walk around lens

: by which I mean

what range do you really work within

. The other MAJOR question is how much do you desire to invest? . . .

Terry, you have already these lenses:

“catechism 18-55….50mm…..28-80….Tamron seventy-300….Sigma 10-20……150-500…”

Those incorporate a Focal Length range 10mm to 500mm – which is substantial.

Ane style of anticipating what FL range you need/want in your new
“walk around lens”
would be to take a review of the pictures that you’ve already made and assess what FL range y’all used the most.

If you lot desire to be pedantic, I understand that there are (freeware) downloadable programmes which can spit out that statistic from a bunch of EXIF Files – but I’ve never used them – I know I that I use for
‘walk almost’
the 24mm to 135mm range, (on 135 Format Camera) by far and away the well-nigh often – 85%~90% of the time.

My ‘walk about lens’ choices have always reflected that FL Compass. My most contempo purchase existence the 24 to 105/4L IS because it covers generally all that range and because I can crop the FoV at FL =105mm, to the FoV of a 135mm lens, with not much loss.



connaughtgreen is offline

Re: Canon 18-135 or 28-135?

My my such a lot of info for my senior brain only i suppose thats what i love about this place then much help so many fantastic people all eager to assist.I realise i have a skillful focal length range but merely wanted to become one lens to cover my daily needs on a holiday or merely a ramble then i am making way for the xviii-135 STM and i will get back to y’all later on i have it.

Final edited past connaughtgreen; 10th June 2016 at
07:23 PM.


connaughtgreen is offline

Re: Canon 18-135 or 28-135?

my 18-135 STM has arrived not had a walk most with it yet just took a few shots in the garden and tin honestly say what a lovely lens it is so thank you lot for all your communication and opinions once again

Source: https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/forums/thread53451.htm