We all want the best we can get for the cheapest cost possible. That’s why Acura and Lexus exist, to offer very similar features to BMW and Mercedes at a lower price point for price minded consumers who want quality and features not just the cheapest possible.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

That’s where the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (get yours at B&H Photo Video) comes into play. It’s a very capable lens with very good sharpness, image stabilization, all at 1/3 the cost of the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM (get yours at B&H Photo Video). So let’s see if it’s worth buying the Toyota Camry over the Lexus LS460.

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

Pros:

• Image stabilization (at an affordable price also!)
• Very fast and precise auto focus because of Canon’s USM (ultrasonic motor) technology
• Acceptable sharpness
• Cost: ~$350-$400
• Light weight
• Excellent focal range
• Semi-decent macro capabilities (.19x magnification at 135mm)
• Minimum focusing distance (MFD) of 1.64 feet (0.5 m)

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

Cons:

• Slower aperture (f/3.5-5.6)
• First generation Image Stabilization
• Zoom creep
• Price indicative of build quality
• Strong barrel and pincushion distortion throughout
• Decent contrast and colors
• 6 blade aperture (doesn’t make for very nice sun stars)
• Lens hood not included
• Minimum focusing distance (MFD) of 1.64 feet (0.5 m)

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

Pros:

• Constant f/4 aperture through the entire focal range
• 3 stop Image Stabilization
• Excellent build quality
• Razor sharp edge to edge
• Portable (compared to other L lenses)
• Has good wide angle
• Decent macro capabilities
• Excellent fast and quiet auto focus

Cons:

• Noticeable barrel and pincushion distortion
• Could use a bit more focal range
• Cost
• Heavier compared to the 28-135mm

Side-by-Side Comparison

For those of us who like the pretty side-by-side comparison charts of the Canon EF 28-135mm versus Canon 24-105mm:

Thoughts and Performances

Look how fragile the lens barrel looks

I’ve owned the 28-135mm for a number of months and it was a love/hate relationship to say the least. For the most part, the lens performed fine. It was usually soft, but on rare occasions, you can get some really sharp images from it. I’m generally accustomed to faster lenses, so the times I’ve had to use it in challenging conditions (low light), I’ve found it slow to acquire focus and track subjects (AI Servo). It’s definitely nice having image stabilization (IS) without paying a fortune for it, but it’s one of Canon’s first generation IS and you’ll find it not very smooth when it stabilizes; the image “jumps” into focus, a bit disarraying when you’re not expecting it. The build quality is decent, but I find myself having to worry about it more often than not such as is the barrel extending (zoom creep) when I’m walking around. There is also some barrel play unlike the 24-105mm where the barrel is not even fidgeting when fully extended to 105mm.

Used on a 1.6x crop body, the 28-135mm doesn’t have much of a wide angle to speak of (28mm x 1.6 = 44.8mm), but it does have some nice telephoto “reach” (135mm x 1.6 = 216mm) compared to the 24-105mm’s 168mm. I’ve found both the 28-135mm and 24-105mm work best on a full-frame body such as the 5D, 5D Mark II, 1Ds Mark II, and 1Ds Mark III; there is just a certain unexplainable quality, but YMMV.

The three big things to love with the 28-135mm is the low cost, the IS, and the focal range. Other than that, there isn’t much of anything else to love about the lens. This lens has one of the best focal ranges for an EF lens and comes in real handy when you need it.

Much of what I have to say about the 24-105mm, I’ve already detailed in my previous review post here, but I’ll repost here as a refresher.

In a nutshell, the 24-105mm easily blows away the 28-135mm in every regard including price. If you’ve never handled a L lens before, the 24-105mm is certainly a nice entry into the world of Luxury (and bankruptcy). Every piece of the lens is very solid built. When the barrel is full extended, there is absolutely no barrel play what-so-ever unlike the 28-135mm, where if you are not careful, you can snap the barrel apart. Another major element of the Canon L line is the constant aperture. Being able to use 24mm at f/4, 105mm at f/4, and everything else in between at f/4 is very, very nice.

Solidly built.

The 3-stop Image Stabilization is very smooth and well dampened so you don’t experience any pop-into-lock image as you do with the 28-135mm’s IS. Being able to focus closer by .16 inches may not seem like much, but you’ll find it quite useful.

I’ve found that both lenses excel for portrait work. The 24-105mm really shines in this area as it is deadly sharp wide open where the 28-135mm needs to be stopped down a stop or two to achieve some level of decent sharpness.

Recommendation

If you can afford it, get the 24-105mm, you won’t regret it with your very first photo shoot with it. It is currently my favorite and most used lens for many situations from just walking around or portrait photography. On the other hand, you can’t really go wrong with the 28-135mm. It’s an older lens designed for film cameras, but works just fine with Canon’s dSLRs. For under $400 with Image Stabilization, it’s a hard lens to pass over. Unlike other EF-S lenses that cost as much or more, the 28-135mm can be used on full-frame cameras whenever you chose to upgrade (and if you chose to). I would certainly recommend this lens to anyone shooting a Rebel series (XT, XTi, XSi, XS) or even the pro-sumer grade (20D, 30D, 40D, 50D). While not as wide as the 18-55mm kit lens or as much reach as the 55-200mm, the 28-135mm’s image quality is much better than both those lenses.