Dec 4, 2004, 07:15
The 17-85 should be very comparable to the 28-135. (And no surprise, given Canon's D-Rebel and 10D 1.6x crop factor, the 17-85 gives you an effective 27-136mm range! This was clearly intended as a general purpose consumer-level walk-around lens.) So the question is: which range will be more useful to you?
But it is incorrect to think that IS offsets the problem of "slow" lenses. An f/2.8 lens allows you to achieve faster shutter speeds for the same exposure than a slower lens - two full stops faster than an f/5.6 lens. Thus, smaller f/stop makes a "faster" lens. With IS though, it's quite the opposite - it allows you to shoot at SLOWER shutter speeds without a tripod ... it reduces the effect of camera shake, but does not give you a faster shutter speed. This is important, because your SUBJECT might be moving and require a faster shutter - IS does not necessarily make this possible.
I had the 28-135 IS lens, and really liked it for what it was. But it was not fast enough or long enough for my purposes, nor was it consistenly sharp across the focal range. And I don't believe that any consumer-grade zooms will be especially sharp wide open. (The 28-135 was a real gem in the 50-100mm range at f/8, especially on a tripod in a studio setting.)
My opinion with Canon lenses is that "upgrade" generally means "L." Not always: the 50mm f/1.8 is a great lens for the price, though I prefer the 50 f/1.4 for a number of reasons. The 70-200 f/4L is super but not fast - I usually bump up my ISO to 200 or 400 when using this lens. The 70-200 f/2.8L IS is out of my price range, but that would be my #1 choice if I won the lottery.
I don't have a wide lens, but would consider the 17-40 f/4L if I didn't need the speed. Haven't decided yet. More likely I will get the 35mm f/2 prime (or the 35mm f/1.4L as the lottery winner's choice. Actually, the 16-35mm f/2.8L would be my lottery choice.
)
I had a bad experience with a Sigma "EX" lens (their so-called best) and won't buy their products again, though many people claim the 70-200 f/2.8 is a winner. For shorter zoom lenses I'd consider Tamron's Di series (17-35 XR Di and 28-75 XR Di) instead of Sigma.
But it is incorrect to think that IS offsets the problem of "slow" lenses. An f/2.8 lens allows you to achieve faster shutter speeds for the same exposure than a slower lens - two full stops faster than an f/5.6 lens. Thus, smaller f/stop makes a "faster" lens. With IS though, it's quite the opposite - it allows you to shoot at SLOWER shutter speeds without a tripod ... it reduces the effect of camera shake, but does not give you a faster shutter speed. This is important, because your SUBJECT might be moving and require a faster shutter - IS does not necessarily make this possible.
I had the 28-135 IS lens, and really liked it for what it was. But it was not fast enough or long enough for my purposes, nor was it consistenly sharp across the focal range. And I don't believe that any consumer-grade zooms will be especially sharp wide open. (The 28-135 was a real gem in the 50-100mm range at f/8, especially on a tripod in a studio setting.)
My opinion with Canon lenses is that "upgrade" generally means "L." Not always: the 50mm f/1.8 is a great lens for the price, though I prefer the 50 f/1.4 for a number of reasons. The 70-200 f/4L is super but not fast - I usually bump up my ISO to 200 or 400 when using this lens. The 70-200 f/2.8L IS is out of my price range, but that would be my #1 choice if I won the lottery.
I don't have a wide lens, but would consider the 17-40 f/4L if I didn't need the speed. Haven't decided yet. More likely I will get the 35mm f/2 prime (or the 35mm f/1.4L as the lottery winner's choice. Actually, the 16-35mm f/2.8L would be my lottery choice.
) I had a bad experience with a Sigma "EX" lens (their so-called best) and won't buy their products again, though many people claim the 70-200 f/2.8 is a winner. For shorter zoom lenses I'd consider Tamron's Di series (17-35 XR Di and 28-75 XR Di) instead of Sigma.
_______________________________________
Everybody got to elevate from the norm!