Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

A strong lens for light but serious travel photography on crop digital. I match it with the Tokina 12-24 f4(an excellent lens) and get 19-200+ range on the digital Rebel, with IS on the upper end. Though it's a slow lens, that's not as bad on the digitals as the Canon CMOS makes great pictures at high ISO's. I also use it on my EOS 3 for film shots and it does a good job there, too. If you get a good copy, you'll be very pleased. (I shoot RAW any way and my shots are always a bit neutral until I post process; the lens provides good detail for that.)

Good range, decent sharpness, can be used on film cameras, too.

Some zoom creep
Not super small
can pick up dust

Canon 50 1.8, 35 2, 28-70 2.8L, 70-200 4L
Tokina 12-24 f4

Never needed

Crap. I've had this lens now for 18mths and I'm always questioning the quality of the images. I've taken it on 4 overseas trips as a walkaround lens and I have never been happy with the images when I have returned.
The fall out of quality towards the edges at any focal lenght is unaceptable for a lens of this price. I use this lens with a UV filter and a CR Pl filter and the brightness in the view finder on my 30D is so low. I have had it back to Canon twice for repairs over the time that I have had it, both times the AF would be incorrect at the full wide and full zoom. The IS would never settle upon focusing and the image would "jump" in the view finder.
I have now started to use the 70 to 300mm kit lens more often again as that lens seems to be more reliable in focasing and image results. (bad indictment for the AU$780 28-135mm lens)
If I had known that this lens was as bad as it was I would have sunk the money into a 70-200 f/4 L and done away with the loss in focal lenght from between my 10 to 22mm canon (which is a far more superior quality lens for the money compared to the 28 to 135mm) and the "L" series.

If I had paid AU$200 for this lens I wouldn't mind, but the premium price does not reflect the quality of the lens that you get.

Other Lens that I use and have done direct comparisons too are:
Canon 50mm f/1.8 macro
Canon 85mm f/1.8 Macro
Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro
Canon 10-22mm f/3.5
Canon 18-55mm f/3.5 Kit lens
Canon 70-300mm f/3.5 Kit lens

If you are interested I have comparitive Koren lens test files between the 28-135mm, 70-300mm and the 100mm for a true comparison.

Build Quality

Everything else

Canon 50mm f/1.8 macro
Canon 85mm f/1.8 Macro
Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro
Canon 10-22mm f/3.5
Canon 18-55mm f/3.5 Kit lens
Canon 70-300mm f/3.5 Kit lens

Canon warranty has been good.

THis lens has a decent zoom range which is actually quite good for portrait. IS works quite well in low light conditions, but still I would get occasional blurred pictures. However, it works much bettern than one without IS.

Picture quality is what I have expected. It 's not tack sharp but OK.
However, autofocus is fast and precise.

This is my walkaround lens replacing the 18-55mm kit lens

IS making indoor shooting quite convenient without using a flash.
Good value for its price.
Good zoom range
solidly built even though it 's plastic

FIlter for such lens size is expensive
Range not low enough to cover wide angle on 1.6x crop cameras

I bought this lens on ebay to compare to the Tamron 24-135 already in my possesion. I'd been happy with the Tamron, but wanted to see how the IS would work along with my high level EOS bodies (1N, 3, Elan 7e) as well as compare sharpness. The first favorable impression was the AF speed and accuracy. BIG difference on all bodies, especially the EOS3. Picture quality is as good or better than the Tamron and with the addition of IS and full time manual focus capability for touchup if the AF grabbed the wrong point it was no contest. The Tamron went to market along with the EOS 1n a little while ago. As has been said many times, it's not 'L', but it's more than acceptable for any but the most critical applications. Would a little more speed be desirable? Sure! But, at what cost? I don't seem to have a problem with zoom creep as some do, and I find the polycarbonate construction excellent for what it is. You can't compare the feel of a modern lens to the all metal construction of the past. Mine is smooth in the zoom action, having much less drag thean the Tamron, and as I said, the AF is great. It's become my full time carry around, and I don't regret buying it.

High degree of sharpness for intermediate lens., and hangs in pretty well against high level glass for most applications.
Solid construction.
Fast, accurate AF.
Very useful zoom range for film and full size digital cameras.
One of the best general purpose lens' around, and meets expectations for price.

Slight distortion at zoom extremes.
Typical slow aperture at max zoom (but you pay a lot more for faster glass).

Tamron 24-135mm

My only experience with Canon service was a defective flash system on my Rebel G under warranty. Fast service, and correct fix.

I bought this lens as I was doing somephotos for a friend from a helicopter. The IS feature certainly helped and the images were excellent although on some, a little over exposed. Once I'd compensated for this on my Rebel XT, the images were great. I have this as my all purpose lens now and it seems to do everything I need it to - especially shooting with less light. It's great if you're doing indoor shots and want a more natural light feel. My only complaint is that I had to compensate for over exposure and the filters are expensive due to the 72mm size.

Good price, good range, IS and feels solid

Over exposure, 72mm filters required are expensive