what has better image quality?

-- jeff nakayama (moonduck22@hotmail.com), December 09, 2001

Answers

That's easy:
At 24 to 27mm, the 24-85, and
at 86 to 135mm, the 28-135.

Otherwise, they are very similar.

-- Julian Loke (elan7e-owner@yahoogroups.com), December 09, 2001.

haha very funny... does anyone else have any thoughtful opinions or experiences with either of these lenses? thanks.

-- Jeff Nakayama (moonduck22@hotmail.com), December 09, 2001.

Jeff, I personally own the 28-105. Have only tried the other 2 in camera stores. But from all the opinions I've heard all 3 lenses (24-85, 28- 105, 28-135) are very similar in both build and quality of optics, although some claim the 28-135 to be marginally better optically than the other 2. I really think you need to decide if you would rather have the extra wide-angle of the 24-85 or the extra reach and IS of the 28-135. The difference between the 2 lenses otherwise is, in my opinion, probably not worth worrying about. For any really significant upgrade in optical quality I really think you would have to go with the 28-70/2.8 or a couple of good prime lenses. Jim

-- Jim Simon (jsimon724@aol.com), December 09, 2001.

Yeah Jeff, I think Jim nailed that one (Julian is feeling frisky today). Those three Canon zooms--24-85, 28-105 & 28-135--are very similar in optical quality, build quality and most features. For most people it boils down to personal preference and convenience. As you probably know, IS really sets the EF 28-135 IS USM apart from the other two lenses for high vibration situations such as boats, cars, high winds, hand holding in low light, etc.

Photodo.com has tests on all three, but I don't place too much weight on their findings outside of ballpark numbers (they probably test one sample of each lens).

You could choose one based on complimentary focal lengths and common filter sizes. The 24-85 goes great with the EF 70-200 4L USM and they share the 67mm filter size. The 28-105 goes with the EF 100-300 4.5-5.6 USM and they share the 58mm filter size. The only telephoto (no telezoom outside the 35-350) to match the 72mm filter size of the 28-135 is the EF 200 2.8L USM.

-- Puppy Face (doggieface@aol.com), December 09, 2001.

As said before, I think it's probably pretty close, but most accounts that I have heard put the 28-135 IS ahead, even before you consider the extra functionality that IS will give you. I use the 24-85, and I like it a lot, because there's no other canon zoom (and I'm through with third party lenses) which goes as wide, and the width means that I don't have to carry a wider zoom, such as the 20-35. I own a 70- 200F4L, which I don't intend to get rid of any time soon, so the extra length of the 28-135 would not serve a purpose to me, since I would just swap to the faster and, by all accounts, superior L series lens. It really does depend on what other lenses you want to put together with it. Canon have put together a set of "combos" for particular bodies on their US website, and the set for the D30 includes all of the lenses I own (24-85, 70-200 F4L, 300 F4L IS), so Canon obviously recognise the strength of the 24-85+70-200F4L combo.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), December 09, 2001.

The 24-85 and 28-135 are very similar in image quality. To choose which one to buy means deciding upon other criteria, like range, size, weight, filter size, image stabilizer, etc.

I agree that the 24-85 and 70-200 f/4L are are matched pair because of their shared 67mm filter size. However, the 28-135 IS USM also matches nicely with the 100-400 L IS USM, since a 72mm filter will work with both IS zooms (albeit requiring a 77-to- 72mm step-down filter adapter ring on the telezoom).

Cheers

-- Julian Loke (elan7e-owner@yahoogroups.com), December 10, 2001.

I've owned all three lenses and used them extensively. I sold my first 28-105 to buy a 28-135, and after shooting with it for a while, sold it and bought another 28-105.

If you need 24mm at the wide end, then the 24-85 is your choice. I don't, because I have a 20-35L. The 28-105 is the lens that stays on my camera. Bottom line: when I was shooting with the 24-85 or the 28-135, I always found some reason to wish I were using the 28-105. It's just the right combination of just the right features and size.

-- Dave Jenkins (djphoto@vol.com), December 10, 2001.

28-135IS is sharper at 50mm than 24-85 by very little edge. Otherwise no difference.

Both are barrel distorted heavily at short end

Both control flare extremely good considering it is a zoom.

24-85 gives a brighter view finder with EOS50 than 28-135 and a little faster autofocus

I have tested them both against some of the primes that I have and considering selling 24-85 since I bought 28-135IS(still have both)

-- George Zhang (george.zhang@syngenta.com), December 11, 2001.