28 2.8 vs 28-135is

[mkelpie]

Hi and thanks to all the people who answered my question about the

50mm prime vs 28-135is.

 

Now for round two.

 

Does anyone own both these lenses? There are 3 good reviews about it

on this site but nothing really comparing it to the 28-135. Its going

to be used on a 10D so this will make a nice little 45mm. Anyone

tried is head to head with a 28-135, particularly on a DSLR?

 

Thanks,

Mark

[primoz]

I don't own any of those two lenses, but I don't need to own them to tell difference. If you compare only quality, and leave aside that with 28-135 you have zoom lens with 29-135mm bonus compared to 28mm, then it's no brainer. I saw test somewhere with 28mm prime and 17-40mm L. And 28mm prime was A LOT sharper then zoom. And considering 28mm was around $300 and 17-40mm was around $1200+ then you can imagine yourself what you can expect from $300-$400 zoom. But as I said with zoom you get extra 106mm.

[oh_navi]

EF28-135IS is a good standard zoom. You can have focal lengths from 28-135 in only one lens.

However, in terms of optical quality, it is not as good as the prime EF28. I have seen a photo taken by the zoom. The edge of the frame is not that sharp (in focus). Moreover, it does has distortion.

If you like a sharp, low distortion, contrasty, light, compact and cheap, you can go to ef28f2.8, and ef50f1.8 or ef85f1.8.

[cliff_lesergent]

A few years back, I did an informal comparison between the 28mm f2.8, the 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS, and the 28-70mm f2.8L lenses.

 

The lowly EF 28mm f2.8 was sharper, had less falloff, and much less flare, at virtually all apertures, compared to the other two lenses. If you haven't been spoiled by USM focusing, the 28mm f2.8 is a great little lens.

[jimvanson]

The pocket size 28 will out perform the 28-135 IS up to about f8...the two lenses are then on equal footing. Most (all?) primes are the same way, they are better then the optically challenged (ok, rather poor) 28-135 until about two stops down from the zooms maximum aperture.

[mkelpie]

Just to clarify, I presently own the 28-135 I like the idea of having a superlight weight and high quality lens. Ive found one for 60 bills 2nd hand.. think Ill grab it :)

[alex_medeiros]

I recently picked up the 28 2.8 after spending much time trying to decide on a zoom or the more expensive 28 1.8 which is reputedly optically inferior. My main concerns with the 28 2.8 is slow and noisy focusing. After using it for about a week and a half I can tell you the focusing is just fine and more than quick enough and is for the most part very quiet. Results on my first few rolls are very good and are clearly better than my 28-105 at the wider apertures.

Best wishes!

[jim_larson1]

One thought: The "slow" canon primes are small.

 

Changing between 50 and 28 may not be as bad as you think, as both lenses can fit in your pocket.

 

It is only when you start talking about swapping big zoom lenses that you start talking about reaching into the camera bag for stuff. ..

[jonathan_wang]

You're comparing apples to oranges here. In terms of pure image quality, this is a no brainer - the prime is going to be better than the zoom. However, the zoom offers features that the prime doesn't have - a range of focal lengths from wide to telephoto, image stabilization, USM autofocus. You need to figure out what's more important to you.

 

I will say, however, that the 28-135 IS's image quality is far from lackluster. It rated a respectable 3.5 on Photodo. I was very happy with it on my recent trip to Yellowstone - it's an extremely flexible lens.