none... IS should be great, but the glasses...

Incredible soft images produced for the price...

I just can´t understand how can exist people rating this lens at 5... This lens is VERY SOFT, YOU MUST WORK just at f.11 or smaller to see some sharp images!!! The only one is the IS, but... With this glass, IS is useless...

Similar Products Used:

17-40L 18-50 f. 3.5-5.6 Sigma (much better) 55-200 f4.0-5.6 Sigma (same above for minus price)

Great image stabilizer. 28mm is wide enough for walking around with. 135mm reach is also enough for most walking needs.

Weight is considerable, but probably due to the IS equipment. Takes 72mm threaded filters, which are pretty expensive - get a UV filter to protect the front of it anyway.

Great lens, but pricey for amateurs. IS works like a champ. Who should buy this lens? Anyone that needs a meduim telephoto lens and wants/needs IS. Another advantage with this lens is that it's an EF mount - not an EF-S mount. Those that might want to upgrade their 20D to the new, full-frame 5D can use this lens on both. However, it's a bit on the heavy side, probably due to the parts needed to make the IS do it's thing. With the 20D, the setup feels pretty balanced when the lens is cradled. On the Digital Rebel, the combo is a little lens-heavy. This lens is a pretty good primary lens in any kit. At 28mm, it's pretty wide for most needs. Going out to 135mm privides some reach, but it's not going to get into the action if you're more than about 80 feet away or so. I find it's a great "walking" lens, despite the weight. To complement the wide end, I'd suggest the Canon 10-22. For the longer end, I'd suggest the newer 70-300 IS. This is what I've got in my bag, and I couldn't be happier.

IS is wonderful especially for a guy like me who is getting long in the tooth. I like the focal range. When I need a wider lens, I usually have time to put one on the camera - however when I use my 17-40L as my primary lens on a single body, I miss a lot of shots I would have caught with the longer 28-135 IS.

Slow f/stop. I would love to see a steady f/4 and will look with interest at the new 24-105 f/4L. Lousy lens hood that can't be used with a polarizer. What's new - most Canon hoods are lousy.

This is a very nice lens. As pointed out in another review it does everything well. Maybe nothing really great - but everthing well. When I carry 2 bodies, I will use my 17-40L along with my 70-200 f/4L but, when I am using one body and one lens - this is my go-to glass. I believe that I have a very good copy because my images are very sharp and have decent contrast.

Customer Service

N/A

Similar Products Used:

17-40L, 70-200 f/4L

Low light capabilities. Very sharp. IS. Manual override while still in autofocus.

I would like larger apertutres in this focal range(have since purchased 24-70 f2.8. Now that's a phenominal lens!) My zoom has recently started to jam about halfway thru zoom. Have to get it serviced. Don't know if the cost will be worth it.

A most capable lens! I purchased it when it first came out. First used it on my EOS3, now my D10 and soon to be D20. I love IS, but it definitely drains the batteries. I use it more discriminately now. Low light capability is it best attribute. It's a very fast focusing lens.

Customer Service

My manual focus ring on the 100-400 locked up. Cost $350 to repair. With an initial cost of $1800, this has turned out to be one expensive lens. On the other hand, it has had a tremendous amount of use and I LOVE it!

Similar Products Used:

24-70 f2.8, 100-400 IS, 20-35 AF USM.

Fast and quiet AF, USM is best AF system on market IMHO. IS let you use smaller aperture or longer exposure time than you usually can.

Wide end is too narrow for dSLR. Canon doesn't include hood, which is quite expensive(ca 60$ for a piece of plastic, c'mon). AF hunts sometimes in low light, but not too often. Image is little bit soft at aperture wide open.

This is my main lens, i'll shoot 90% images with it. When i can afford Canon 24-70/2,8, i'll buy it, but meanwhile i'm pretty happy with my 28-135 IS lens. It's not very cheap lens, but IS and fast quiet AF compensates price.

Customer Service

none needed

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 28-70/2,8 Tokina 28-70/2,8 Canon 35-80

Versatility, Image Stabilization, and image quality.

Critical sharpness for applications requiring pin sharp detail is not there.

This is my favorite lens, and stays on my camera most all the time for general and pro use. IS and broad coverage made me buy it, and good images made me keep it. Lots of people talk about image quality, on both extremes, and I don't know how much of that points toward manufacturing consistancy, or if it falls on heightened expectations. But, for a zoom with it's coverage, it is sharper than it has any right to be, and the final images look very smooth, while maintaining a roundness with good tones and color. I rented a 28-70mm a while back to compare, and the 600 extra dollars doesn't buy alot more in the way of sharpness, but it's a huge step up in build quality and for the constant wide aperture. For me, as a portrait shooter who has a hatred toward tripods, this is the lens I always wanted. It's coverage and functionality is fantastic, and for portraits, it's smooth and round image quality is to die for. Though, in fairness, if I shot landscapes or architecture, the lack of critical sharpness for that application would make this lens a bad choice. Though, in fairness, I doubt any pro photographer in those fields would put this lens at the top of their wish list. Zoom lenses are a trade off, period. You're trading off sharpness and distortion control for functionality. Even Canon's coveted L zooms (of which I own two) trade some sharpness and distortion control for wider apertures and zoom coverage. What you need to ask, is if the trade offs are made up in functionality for your purpose. For me, they are, and I'm very happy with it, and happy leaving my sharper lenses in the bag while I use it.

Customer Service

Good. They do what they say they will, but sometimes, it takes more time than I'd like.

Similar Products Used:

Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS Canon 17-35mm L Canon 50mm 1.4 Canon 100-400mm L IS

Sharpness as a non-L; ability to close-focus as a non-macro lens; good range of focal length- although 24-135 is better, especially for DSLRs; IS works well.

build quality; nothing much

This is a replacement for my 28-200 Canon zoom. It's a sharp lens producing satisfying results. I use it mainly for landscape/people. I find it sharp for both (well not as sharp as my 70-200 f4 in the same focal length, but what do you expect a non-L lens to do). Great and light weight for travel when you need mostly wide angles and occasionally portraits. The only thing is that the bokeh is not as nice and diffused as some portrait lenses, like the f4 and even my 50 f1.8. Well, at the end of the day, I don't think Canon designed this lens especially for portrait. I think this is a good all-rounder. On a DSLR, it becomes a 45 - 210, which is not wide enough, but good range and discreet for candids.

Similar Products Used:

24-85; 70-200 f4; 50 f1.8; 75 - 300 non-IS

IS is great, lens look like "professional" with the hood (not included)

SOFT SOFT AND SOFT!!!!! DUST IN THE LENS IS A JOKE; POOR OPTICAL QUALITY, SIGMA 18-50 is better!!!

I was happy when I had this lens just for using on my 135mm camera, just for some personal clicks, cause for professional works I always used medium format cameras. But , when I bought a 10D and used it, what a @#!%$!!!! This lens is a mistake!!! Very SOFT SOFT AND SOFT!!! The optical quality is very poor!!! By the way, my EOS 10D has just 5000 shots and err99 all the time!!! Canon, I´m very disappointed with your products!!! I´m going to migrate to Nikon, at least I don´t need to buy lenses, flashes when I upgrade my equipment!!! Canon, never more!!!

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 18-50mm DC Sigma 55-200mm DC EF 100mm 2.8 macro EF 50mm 1.8 (the best) EF 20-35mm 3.5-4.5

Image Stabilisation, Colour, good resolution, sharp when stopped down a stop or two.

Bit pricey, should have come with a hood.

Very good lens. Sharp once you stop it down a little bit. Bit soft wide open, which can be flattering for portraits. IS is a fantastic invention. The people on here who are saying it isn't sharp are either snobs or have only tried the lens wide open. Ignore them. The Image stabilisation means you can stop this lens down a coupe of clicks and still hand hold and you will get very nice photos.

Customer Service

not needed.

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 28-300 whcih is okay but the IS makes this lens much mroe usable.

none

hmm almost too many

Pleas avoid this lens it is simply not sharp or good enough for the money. I will recomand other types and brands sigma 28-300,canon 24-85,tamron 28-75 and alike..But NOT this..sorry Canon..put some L glass and in it,and then well see.. sorry

Customer Service

well?

Similar Products Used:

see above