|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on June 30, 2017 Pros: Versatility Cons: Optical and constructive quality Opinion: In the end, I recount it after giving it away for lack of use, due to the qualitative limits of the images it is giving. It is an optic that might have a sense on the film, in which (although final) was designed: very few potential buyers A non-professional and handymanlike lens like this would have focused on looking at the frames with the magnifying glass, and the versatility given by the broad focal range, the stabilizer and the internal USM MAF could therefore effectively represent predominant factors in evaluating the Lens for this kind of users (of which I also belonged in all respects). Digital digital instead, especially if in FF, the optical limits prevail over any other evaluation, and it is a fact that the distortion, pronounced at barrel To 28mm and 135mm bearing, vignetting, 28mm to TA and also present with a diaphragm closure, and especially sharpness to the edges, really mo It is all about the focal, and sometimes embarrassingIn some situations, because linked to a clear spherical aberration of the MAF plane, they do not allow the sharpness at the center of the image, generally good and even good around the 50mm, to improve a totally negative judgment. The photos taken are in fact immancabilmente afflicted now from one, now on the other, now from all the listed defects, with the aggravating of a blur nervous and unpleasant in diaphragmatic shots, because of the only 6 lamella from the straight edge Rather than rounded. Finally, every time (ever more rare after purchasing the Eos 5D) that I was forced to use this goal, I was then able to count on more or less unsatisfactory images on the quality level, so much to make me think "Acci ... if I did this with 24, with 50, with 85 ..." rnThere is nothing to do: since, with the advent of digital, the detailed view Is at the reach of everyone (magnificationTo 100% on a good monitor), this optic in my view has lost its reason to exist. Much more if you consider the qualitative abyss that there is compared to the very much more expensive zoom, you want on the new you want on the used.rn plasticine and ballerina construction, with the front part of the lens that moves in millimeters inside The barrel, and the continuous buildup of dust between the inner lenses, strident with aesthetic and somewhat pretentious sizing, complete a really bad picture for me. I left it without any regrets.rn |
 | sent on April 02, 2017 Pros: Stabilization, fast engine, design, compactness, sharpness, size and strength, focal. Cons: little light, barrel down alone, 28mm maybe a little 'pochetti. Opinion: I bought this lens recently and I must say that perhaps they have made too many bad reviews ... sure it's not a 24-105 and has a lot of difettucci, but as zoom is really good, sharp enough, but not too much. ... stabilization is in my opinion excellent, per se is very robust and also large and easy to handle ... a little dark but not so much as the classic 18-55 on FF can be a good buy for all do very little and be useful in many situations! |
  | sent on September 15, 2016 Pros: focal range, Ultrasonic af Cons: Dust enters easily, zoom that goes down alone Opinion: It is a couple of months that I use, produces beautiful photos with my 1200d, hungry for light, pictures indoors and at night it is the duty flash, good sharpness from 50 to 100 t, from 5.6 up good on almost all focal lengths. noisy and less effective stabilizer than the 18-55, found used complete with hood original 170 x euro and I would say the price was a good buy, when holding the machine on the zoom neck down by itself and I noticed that the dust easily enters the interior of the target, however, so far without compromising photos. Also convenient manual focus even with af inserted. |
 | sent on July 14, 2016 Pros: As old as am I and the lens too, I appreciate it very much: autofocus, IS, colors, sharpness, all of them are pretty good. I have this lens again, and I am without breath with it: Try once and You'll never abandon it. I am no pro. I'm old enough to afford anybody on this field. See the photos I've shot with this lens, they are on my web-site www.marioconsole.it etc. Cons: None Opinion: Great, Creative. I see that it's expensive too (on Amazon). The use on a Canon 6d, in many situations of light and movement. In particular I like to photograph the night sky, because I love to see and try to recognize and name the stars, the galaxies, the planets, from my balcony facing south. I would say that performs its task well. |
 | sent on September 23, 2015 Pros: Zoom range, the price of used, Af fast Cons: Stabilizer dated Opinion: Great all-rounder on full frame; behaves very well, the autofocus is fast and quiet, dials zoom and focus are quite fluid and covers many of the most commonly used focal lengths from wide angle to medium tele.rnPeccato to the stabilizer of the first generation, a bit 'noisy and therefore difficult to use for this video.rnApparte ithout a doubt one of the best all-rounder if you do not want to spend too much |
 | sent on December 05, 2014 Pros: versatility, robustness Cons: extreme focal underperforming, stabilizer first generation Opinion: And 'the story of many. A range of focal optimal and well used, surrounded by extreme forcibly stuck. 28 135 from 50 to 70 mm fixed focal length makes it as good. In this context, my hat. Extending up to 100 mm, the yield is still maintained at high level. To 135 mm, the MTF undergoes a pronounced downturn. On the opposite side, the yield is good to 35 mm, but the distortion to 28 mm is above average. The color yield is satisfactory, as well as the tonal contrast. Solid construction and stabilizer (although first-generation, less effective than it will be done later) complete the picture of a lens that now appears on the used market quotes very interesting. |
 | sent on October 22, 2014 Pros: Robust, do everything, good paintings on aps Cons: brightness', of FF 135 are few. Opinion: It is the now my lens for several years, I was "fairly" well both on canon 350 of that canon 5d .We do anything and those 135 and more than a little help !! On APS becomes almost a 220 .., on FF 135 sometimes not bastano..almeno edges the qualita'e'inferiore.Su ff 28 mm distorted by fear, avoid extremes dell'obiiettivo.Adesso is at bargain prices, for less than 200 Euros, you can 'really entertain and take off some sfizio.Si can make good photos, I recommend it! The "24-105" is just one more mondo..ma worth at least three times as much still to be used .. |
 | sent on April 19, 2013 Pros: focal range of FF "handyman", light, sharp, stabilized, USM true Cons: loss of detail at the edges, focal range suitable for little handyman on aps-c Opinion: I have tried several objectives to be used as a "handyman" on the 5D: 24-70, 28-80, 28-105, and in the end I always found too short, the "tele". rnL'ho purchased for its 135mm, despite the bad reputation to discover that it is, in part, immeritata.rnOvvero, the loss of detail at the edges exist, but in the conditions of use "by jack of all trades" is difficiolmente detectable if not going after her : hardly, in fact, the central subject in a picture with the edge of the photo contains elements in focus. rnrnIn hand, those 135mm, together with the stabilizer is also much more effective than what I had read around (better, IMHO, than the 18-55IS which should be 1 stop higher), make it an excellent travel companion on FF.rnrnPS: my exemplary seems not suffer any of the problems of solidity described by others: only and does not stretch from the extracted game has a relatively small, though comparable to that of other zoom extensible. Of course, it gives the impression of smontarsi.rnrn |
user12743  | sent on July 06, 2012 Pros: Focal length, Ultrasonic Motor, effective stabilization (although the first generation), sharpness on APS-C. Cons: Sensation of minimum strength, overweight, not very bright. Opinion: I bought this light to replace versatility in what was the limited focal length range of 18-55 IS kit. I state that I use with a 1000D, was certainly sharper and USM provides the right speed to avoid losing key moments. Moreover, the stabilization is quite effective, although in the case of tripod is suitably turned off as it is not detected. The first impression of sturdiness and ease of handling by the weight and the construction can be removed instantly by turning the zoom ring, as it often falls on its own and is movable within the barrel too. On the other hand the focus is very precise, and has a feature full-time manual focusing. Great all-rounder, it lends itself as an alternative to the lens of the first honest kit. I do not earn much more in full quality, so who wants to make a significant step forward in image quality has no option other solutions. The hood is sold separately, costicchia, but it is well finished, with velvet inside to capture dust. Aesthetic appeal to the fanatics of course, has a very professional look ... if only aesthetically. |
 | sent on May 08, 2012 Pros: Range of focal lengths covered, AF, colors, sharpness in the center (very good on the whole frame of APS-C), honest resistance to flare and vignetting. Cons: Edges on full frame is not exceptional with a fair amount of chromatic aberration, barrel front a bit 'loose, IS is not very efficient (but it is the first made by canon), front lens which tends to suck up dust if you do not use a filter. Opinion: I have a few days this goal, with the intention of using it as a handyman when I go "light" with the 5dmk2. First impressions are positive: honest and reliable optical, taking up not just reasonable, but acceptable weight. Too bad that the yield on the edge is only fair, while it is quite astounding the central area, corresponding to the size aps-c for instance, really sharp already wide open. To improve the performance a bit 'less convincing enough to work at short focal F5, 6, while at F8 there is a general improvement, especially at the edges. Great AF. Not to use the idea of ??being very strong, in some specimens the front stretches alone if facing down (mine does not, perhaps the rings a little 'tighter). This is my example is a bit 'noisy and helps bit (2 stop with a lot of optimism). In any case run in full the cost of a good used (about 220-270 €). |
 | sent on April 03, 2012 Pros: Focal range, stabilizer, USM, manual focus override. Cons: Weight, clarity, luminosity. Opinion: Inexperienced and ill-advised I have taken this lens with the body of the 1000D, instead of the kit of lenses, in fact wanted to avoid having to change lenses. I have this lens for 3 years and I must say that as optical handyman is not bad at all. Coupled with the 1000D is too heavy, everything is quite unbalanced. The image stabilizer works very well, I could take in otherwise impossible conditions, especially with an entry level as the 1000D that does not handle very well the high ISO. Focus is quick and quiet, and when I had some problems and has been more due to the body that the lens. I must say that is a lens that is wasted on APS-C, because you lose all the wide-angle range, I've never used the 18-135 EF-S, but perhaps it would be preferable on a machine such as the entry level 1000D on l `which I used (and use) I. Another advantage is that you can work on the focus manually at any time. The quality of the images is not the best, the colors just live and lacking contrast. A big drawback is that is filled with dust, for now, this did not affect the images, but in the long run I think it will affect `. The quality of construction seems good, but dancing in front of the lens, the fact that pointed down qunado carries around the weight of the front lens lets you constantly extended not feel good. It is used for excellent prices, again in my opinion not worth it. |
 | sent on March 12, 2012 Pros: Money, very large focal range, image stabilization Cons: Brightness Opinion: It 's the first non-kit lens I purchased (at the time of EOS 1000D) heme are led through a 550D and now on 7D: For the money it costs is really a good goal, stabilized (it was the first stabilized lens in the history of Canon) compact lightweight but sturdy construction (in relation to its cost). Never had any problems and in good light conditions has always given good results level. Suffers from chromatic aberration and fringing at the edges under raking light and backlight pushed. I bought several other focal targets, but at the moment it is still my base zoom (as it provides good results). I'll change it with the 24-105L IS USM to complete my outfit. |
 | sent on February 08, 2012 Pros: Focal, stabilization, construction Cons: Brightness, sharpness. Opinion: To the touch, is robust enough, not so plasticky as ones of lesser quality, even if, the front bale, especially at long focal lengths. I used it for a few years on 30D, but also low ISO, machine on a tripod and still subject, did not give me an acceptable sharpness, the edges were always mixed and lacked detail. On APSC is a good handyman, even if the 28mm (then 45), do not offer a large field to make landscapes. Not very bright, the stabilization of the first generation helps a bit ', but many times I was not able to bring home the shot, especially with moving subjects and light just poor. |
 | sent on October 12, 2011 Pros: Range focal handyman on a FF Cons: The front piece dancing in the barrel. A bit plasticky, dust and hair. dim Opinion: The Canon EF 28-135 IS USM I was never convinced. The photo at the edges are "frayed". Even stopping down the situation improves. the only value is the stabilizer. Mounted on the 5D file returns soft and blurry, especially at 135 mm. Dim. Should be noted that mounted on the 7D produces amazing results. Razor sharp detail, great colors and high contrast .. amazing, a different perspective .. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
