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

Michael Thomas Mitchell wrote:

When I recently picked up a really cheap second hand 5D (original), this lens was basically thrown in for free. ($360 for both body and lens... not bad.) I've owned several of these over the years, but it has been years since I last had one on my camera.

The chief advantage of this lens is versatility. It's a generous zoom range, and includes stabilization, too, making it appropriate for a large variety of settings and conditions. Plus, being full-frame compatible, it's not terribly large nor heavy.

The chief disadvantage is the f3.5-5.6 variable aperture. This certainly isn't a bright lens. On the other hand, that upper telephoto range wouldn't be available on any bright mid-range zoom in the first place.

Optically, I find this lens still surprisingly good. No, it's not L quality. But this is a far more general use lens than an L zoom; for non-critical work, sharpness is just fine. I worry less about distortion these days because raw conversion software addresses the issue sufficiently. There is distortion, and it is easily corrected.

The build is middle of the road. The barrel on every copy I've owned shows play and creep. Again however, this is a lens for general use, not shooting in a war zone for AP.

In summary, this is not a lens that one should compare to modern L glass. It never was that, and especially isn't today. But it's still a fine lens for what it is and what it is meant for, and probably is now actually underrated given how low the prices are going on it. I would easily use this lens in combination with an old 5D for travel in places where more expensive gear may not be prudent.

There isn't much I would actually disagree with there, but do you know the expression "damning with faint praise"?