<>
By the way, I was receiving error 99 on my 10D and returned
it to Canon. They replaced the shutter and returned it within two weeks. I
was impressed.
--
Roger Skully
<>
Was this under warranty?
If not - how much?
Good light
Grega
_
On Jul 12, 2004, at 8:47 AM, Roger Skully wrote:
I have forgotten what the symbols on this IS lens mean. There is a
vertical
bar | and a circle o on the lens. Which symbol turns on the image
stabilization. By the way, I was receiving error 99 on my 10D and
returned
it to Canon. They replaced the
I have forgotten what the symbols on this IS lens mean. There is a vertical
bar | and a circle o on the lens. Which symbol turns on the image
stabilization. By the way, I was receiving error 99 on my 10D and returned
it to Canon. They replaced the shutter and returned it within two weeks. I
was imp
On Oct 31, 2003, at 12:55 PM, Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter) wrote:
Edward Druy wrote:
Has anyone had a problem with their EOS 28-135 IS Zoom having the zoom
mechanism binding at the 35mm focal length. Mine is about 15 months
old, used moderately but never dropped. When I go from 28 to above
Edward Druy wrote:
Has anyone had a problem with their EOS 28-135 IS Zoom having the zoom
mechanism binding at the 35mm focal length. Mine is about 15 months
old, used moderately but never dropped. When I go from 28 to above,
there is a catch in the mechanism which sounds and feels like a
Has anyone had a problem with their EOS 28-135 IS Zoom having the zoom
mechanism binding at the 35mm focal length. Mine is about 15 months
old, used moderately but never dropped. When I go from 28 to above,
there is a catch in the mechanism which sounds and feels like a broken
bearing or gear
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 1:41 AM
Subject: Re: EOS 28 - 135 IS USM lens for sale
>
>
> Steve Parrott wrote:
>
> >I have an EXCELLANT A++ condition 28 - 135 IS USM lens for sale
Steve
How much did you want for that lens? Please reply off list :)
Jerome Davin
866-816-8605
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.geocities.com/jedavin
*
***
***
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*http://www.a1.nl/p
Steve Parrott wrote:
I have an EXCELLANT A++ condition 28 - 135 IS USM lens for sale. This lens
is perfect, no scratches or abrasions on lens or glass. I have just
switched to an L lens, that is the only reason I am selling this one.
Steve,
I'm curious... which L lens is replacing the 28-135I
I have an EXCELLANT A++ condition 28 - 135 IS USM lens for sale. This lens
is perfect, no scratches or abrasions on lens or glass. I have just
switched to an L lens, that is the only reason I am selling this one. Also
to go along with it are the following:
Canon lens hood
1A filter
UV filter
Ci
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002 12:20:42 +0200 "Alex Zabrovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> Can somebody please to clarify for me what are max. aperture
> switching step
> in zoom range of 28-135 IS ? (3.5 -> 4 -> 4.5 -> 5.6)
>
> Regards,
> Alex Z
http://www.kjsl.com/~dave/lenstest/lenstest.html
Dave He
Can somebody please to clarify for me what are max. aperture switching step
in zoom range of 28-135 IS ? (3.5 -> 4 -> 4.5 -> 5.6)
Regards,
Alex Z
*
***
***
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*http://www.a1.nl
Alex Zabrovsky wrote:
>
> Any opinions about this lens ?
> How would you rate it against 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM ?
>
> Photodo has quite rave rating of one giving 3.5 mark (very high-almost
> approaching pro glass rank performance), however the distortions seem
>to be at high level.
> What about fl
Very good, general purpose lens. For me, this lens approaches the concept of
one lens for a camera. IS really works.
Greg
*
***
***
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos
I haven't had any flare problem with the 28-135 (I use always hood,
recomendable).
Distorsion at 28mm it is certainly noticeable, but I do not own
28mm-105, so I cannot compare.
I guess that to obtain less distorsion at this focal lenght you should
go to the 28-70L.
Avoid straight lines at 28mm, e
- Original Message -
From: "Alex Zabrovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 4:12 AM
Subject: EOS 28-135 IS
> Any opinions about this lens ?
> How would you rate it against 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM ?
>
> Photodo h
I have it. Would buy it again if I didn't have it.
For me, the quality is good and the IS is great. Also USM, FTM. Flare? What flare?
rgds,
IVI.
> Any opinions about this lens ?
> How would you rate it against 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM ?
>
> Photodo has quite rave rating of one giving 3.5 mar
Alex Zabrovsky wrote:
> Any opinions about this lens ?
Distorsion at wide end is pretty bad. Avoid straight lines near the
edges of the frame. It's bigger and heavier than 28-105. But I still
love the lens.
*
***
***
* For list
Any opinions about this lens ?
How would you rate it against 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM ?
Photodo has quite rave rating of one giving 3.5 mark (very high - almost
approaching pro glass rank performance), however the distortions seem to be
at high level.
What about flare control ?
Generally, would you be
Hi Jaako,
My EF 28-135 IS USM and EF 100-400 IS USM make two sets of noises when power
is first applied to the lens. I presume this is the result of the internal
lens microprocessor resetting itself, and self-testing the image stabilizer
mechanism and resetting the aperture blades.
Cheers
Julian
That's odd! I just tried that with my 1n and BP-E1. Used the 28-135, took
the battery rack out of the BP, put it back in, got the same noise you
describe. It didn't matter that the IS was off, or even if the camera was
off. This last is really strange. Put on a 50mm f1.8, nothing. 100 f2,
no
I handled my 1V and 28-135 IS lately due lack of battery power, the indicator said 1/2
power was left in the body. I decided to check which kind of batteries I had in my
PB-E2. The camera was switched off. When I took BM-E2 out of PB-E2, the LCD display on
top of the body went clear as I suppos
My doesn't act in this manner. However, the zoom action has become a little
loose and rough after a couple of years. I think all consumer zoom lenses
will collect some dust etc through the lens barrels. Usually, this isn't a
problem. Even a new lens can have a speck or two of something in the l
I let someone borrow my 28-135lens for a day and got it back... with a
similar problem... it sticks both ways at 70mm a little coaxing it will move
again. sure wish I had bought a us lens, have to send it off to B&H for
repair now though... Im glad I bought the extended warranty. ciao!
David
-Original Message-
From: Mike Herkes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Has anyone encountered this problem with the 28-135mm IS USM lens. Just
>yesterday it started to stick when zooming from 28mm to 135mm...
>..The factory service guy
>even made the comment to me that C
Mike Herkes wrote:
> not take this one back because it is beyond their warranty and because I
> have filled out the warranty card it is now a Canon issue. I have talked
> to a few people at Canon at the Factory service center and all they could
> say was I had to bring it in/send it in. Unfor
Hello.
Has anyone encountered this problem with the 28-135mm IS USM lens. Just
yesterday it started to stick when zooming from 28mm to 135mm. When it
reaches approximately 30mm it sticks. It will continue on with a little
coaxing, but when it passes that point again it makes clicking noises.
- Original Message -
From: David Malek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'm wondering if there is any data about the quality of images with IS
> cheaper lenses as compared to L lenses without IS? As i'm considering also
> buying a 28-70 L
> 2.8 ... and already have a 28-135 i'm wondering if it's wor
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/13/01 10:38AM >>>
>>> Where did you find these MTF tests? Photodo.com? If so, where exactly. I
>>> couldn't seem to find them. But I'd love to see other tests for non-L
>>> series lenses. Or if anyone else knows a reliable source for EF lens tests,
>>> I'd appreciate
Trenton Burd wrote:
> Secondly, here is the comparison using Photodo tests.
>
> 28-135mm IS Weighted MTF for 28 mm: f3.5 0.73, f8 0.74
> 28-70 F2.8L Weighted MTF for 28 mm: f2.8 0.77, f8 0.81
>
> 28-135mm IS Weighted MTF for 50 mm: f4.5 0.81, f8 0.82
> 28-70 F2.8L Weighted MTF for 40 mm
> Secondly, here is the comparison using Photodo tests.
>
> 28-135mm IS Weighted MTF for 28 mm: f3.5 0.73, f8 0.74
> 28-70 F2.8L Weighted MTF for 28 mm: f2.8 0.77, f8 0.81
>
> 28-135mm IS Weighted MTF for 50 mm: f4.5 0.81, f8 0.82
> 28-70 F2.8L Weighted MTF for 40 mm: f2.8 0.75, f4 0.81
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/12/01 03:58PM >>>
>>> Hi maybe the question sound strange but i've just bought a 70-200. And i'm
>>> really concerned by its weight.
>>> I'm wondering if there is any data about the quality of images with IS
>>> cheaper lenses as compared to L lenses without IS? As i'm co
David Malek schrieb:
>
> Hi maybe the question sound strange but i've just bought a 70-200. And i'm
> really concerned by its weight.
>
> I'm wondering if there is any data about the quality of images with IS
> cheaper lenses as compared to L lenses without IS? As i'm considering also
> buying a
In a message dated 7/12/01 2:56:26 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
<< I'm wondering if there is any data about the quality of images with IS
cheaper lenses as compared to L lenses without IS? As i'm considering also
buying a 28-70 L
2.8 ... and already have a 28-135 i'm wo
--- Ken Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Provided you use proper technique (tripod, mirror
> lockup etc.), I don't
> think you will find evidence the EF28-135 will give
> you a better result than
> the EF28-70L. While the cost may be highter than it
> should be, the superior
> quality and faster
> Hi maybe the question sound strange but i've just bought a 70-200. And i'm
> really concerned by its weight.
>
I'll gladly take it off your hands :-)
> I'm wondering if there is any data about the quality of images with IS
> cheaper lenses as compared to L lenses without IS? As i'm consideri
David Malek wrote:
Hi maybe the question sound strange but i've just bought a 70-200. And i'm
really concerned by its weight.
I'm wondering if there is any data about the quality of images with IS
cheaper lenses as compared to L lenses without IS? As i'm considering also
buying a 28-70 L
2.8 ...
Hi maybe the question sound strange but i've just bought a 70-200. And i'm
really concerned by its weight.
I'm wondering if there is any data about the quality of images with IS
cheaper lenses as compared to L lenses without IS? As i'm considering also
buying a 28-70 L
2.8 ... and already have a
Fodor Gábor wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> At the weekend I received my 28-135 IS lens from NY Camera. Just in
> time. I put the lens in my bag and we went to sailing.Great lens, well
> built but I noticed something. In dim lit situation I can see the red
> light (belong to the left focus point) blinkin
Hi All,
At the weekend I received my 28-135 IS lens from NY Camera. Just in
time. I put the lens in my bag and we went to sailing.Great lens, well
built but I noticed something. In dim lit situation I can see the red
light (belong to the left focus point) blinking on the zoom ring of lens
and the
Mr. Bill wrote:
>
> Bob Meyer wrote:
>> For the new EF lenses, it matches the overall barrel diameter.
>
> Which is crazy, because who knows what the barrel diameter of any
> particular lens is?
OTOH, it is the barrel diameter or the bayonet (for the hood) diameter
which determines the size
Bob Meyer wrote:
> For the new EF lenses, it matches the overall barrel diameter.
Which is crazy, because who knows what the barrel diameter of any
particular lens is?
Mr. Bill
*
***
***
* For list instructions, including unsubsc
--- Bob Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- "Mr. Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Tom Pfeiffer wrote:
> > > The only naming convention I've figured out is
> > that the second letter
> > > signifies (W)ide, (S)tandard or (T)elephoto. Is
> > there more to it?
> >
> > Yes,
> >
--- "Mr. Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Tom Pfeiffer wrote:
> > The only naming convention I've figured out is
> that the second letter
> > signifies (W)ide, (S)tandard or (T)elephoto. Is
> there more to it?
>
> Yes,
>
> The first letter "B" is for "bayonet" if no B
> then it's a
>From: "Daniel ROCHA" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Hood rant (was: Re: EOS 28-135 IS hood)
>Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 12:01:22 +0200
>
>From: Mr. Bill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> > So
> the 62 mean? What's the difference between an "II" and a not "II?"
I think the "II" versions added black flocking to the inside surface of the
hoods, to eliminate reflection.
Kim
*
***
***
* For list instructions, including un
The "83" guy may have something!
Daniel ROCHA wrote:
>
> From: Mr. Bill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > So what are the hoods called for the EF 70-210mm f/2.8 L and the EF
> > 28-70mm f/2.8 L?
>
> EF 28-70mm f/2,8L USM = EW-83B
> EF 70-200mm f/2,8L USM = ET-83h
*
***
From: Mr. Bill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> So what are the hoods called for the EF 70-210mm f/2.8 L and the EF
> 28-70mm f/2.8 L?
EF 28-70mm f/2,8L USM = EW-83B
EF 70-200mm f/2,8L USM = ET-83
-- PhOTo -- vOYaGe -- GrAPhiSMe --
Portail : http://perso.magic.fr/drocha
Groupe français Canon EOS :
http://
So what are the hoods called for the EF 70-210mm f/2.8 L and the EF
28-70mm f/2.8 L?
Mr. Bill
Darrell Dorsey wrote:
>
> I believe the number represents the diameter of the hood mounting ring in
> mm. For example the lenses with 77mm filter rings will typically take an
> 83mm hood, i.e. EW-83C
Tom Pfeiffer wrote:
> The only naming convention I've figured out is that the second letter
> signifies (W)ide, (S)tandard or (T)elephoto. Is there more to it?
Yes,
The first letter "B" is for "bayonet" if no B then it's a screw-on or
clamp on.
The number indicates the filter size 52 =
- Original Message -
From: "Tom Pfeiffer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2001 11:48 PM
Subject: Re: Hood rant (was: Re: EOS 28-135 IS hood)
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Mr. Bill" <[EMAIL
"Mr. Bill" wrote:
>
> May I also rant that the EF hoods are way worse than the old FD hoods.
>
> Too big!
> Not as securely or as quickly attached!
> Don't stow anywhere near as nicely reversed!
> Way too fragile, particularly the connection!
> Too complicated a naming/identifying system!
>
> I
- Original Message -
From: "Mr. Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 9:29 PM
Subject: Re: Hood rant (was: Re: EOS 28-135 IS hood)
> May I also rant that the EF hoods are way worse than the old FD hoods.
>
> Too c
May I also rant that the EF hoods are way worse than the old FD hoods.
Too big!
Not as securely or as quickly attached!
Don't stow anywhere near as nicely reversed!
Way too fragile, particularly the connection!
Too complicated a naming/identifying system!
In 20 years I never lost an FD hood. I
- Original Message -
From: "Bob Turner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I think that you would be better with the Canon hood, EW-78B, as it is
> designed for that lens. It's what I use on mine and I have had no problem
> with the unit.
I would additionally suggest that beca
Andreas W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in part:
...
> How can a large manufacturer justify the expensive prices of such simple
> objects as lens hoods? IMO, hoods should be included as standard equipment
> with all lenses. This is one area where the after market is doing much
> better. Even the two
At 05:35 PM 04/17/2001, you wrote:
>How can a large manufacturer justify the expensive prices of such simple
>objects as lens hoods? IMO, hoods should be included as standard equipment
>with all lenses.
This is easy. The 28~135 IS retails for 480.00 and the matched hood is
25.00. Canon will bund
OK, guys, thanks. I'm convinced. I will order the Canon hood.
Ken Durling
Website http://home.earthlink.net/~kdurling/
Alternate e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
***
***
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*ht
-Original Message-
From: Ken Durling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I'm expecting my new 28-135 IS from B&H this week, and I'm realizing
>that I don't think it comes with a hood, does it? I forgot to order
>one. Do I need to use the proprietary hood, or can I use a generic
>72mm hood the I can bu
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jaakko
Pitkäjärvi
Sent: 17 April 2001 20:02
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Vs: EOS 28-135 IS hood
>> I'm expecting my new 28-135 IS from B&H this week, and I'm realizing
>> t
- Original Message -
From: "Jaakko Pitkäjärvi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The lens comes without hood normally. It's difficult to say can you use
generic hood, but I suggest Canon's own flower-shaped model. In my use it
has worked very well and protects lens in an exce
At 02:32 PM 4/17/01, Ken wrote:
>I'm expecting my new 28-135 IS from B&H this week, and I'm realizing
>that I don't think it comes with a hood, does it? I forgot to order
>one. Do I need to use the proprietary hood, or can I use a generic
>72mm hood the I can buy locally? I guess my only concer
Hi Ken,
- Original Message -
From: "Ken Durling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| I'm expecting my new 28-135 IS from B&H this week, and I'm realizing
| that I don't think it comes with a hood, does it? I forgot to order
| one. Do I need to use the proprietary hood, or can I use a generic
| 72mm
> I'm expecting my new 28-135 IS from B&H this week, and I'm realizing
> that I don't think it comes with a hood, does it? I forgot to order
> one. Do I need to use the proprietary hood, or can I use a generic
> 72mm hood the I can buy locally? I guess my only concern would be
> vignetting at t
I'm expecting my new 28-135 IS from B&H this week, and I'm realizing
that I don't think it comes with a hood, does it? I forgot to order
one. Do I need to use the proprietary hood, or can I use a generic
72mm hood the I can buy locally? I guess my only concern would be
vignetting at the wide en
As a professional photographer and University photo instructor for 20 years
let me suggest that the problem with sharpness with the 28 -135IS lens is in
the shooting technique, not the quality of the lens itself.
The first time I used this lens the results were terrible compared to shots I
took
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:26 AM
Subject: EOS 28-135 IS lens
> As a professional photographer and University photo instructor for 20
years
> let me suggest that the problem with sharpness
At 03:51 PM 01/18/2001, you wrote:
>Same story here with my 28-135 IS. I dropped it
FWIW, every repair person I know says that after salt water, impact damage
is THE WORST thing you can do to your camera or lens. Better your head than
your lens. :-)
--
regards,
Henry Posner
Director of Sales a
> But none of these are IS, as Skip was referring to
>
> Tom P.
Tom,
Missed the IS part. As Rosanne Rosandana would say, never mind!!
Darrell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
***
***
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I had something similar happen to one of my old lenses - when I bumped it
> against something, but after forsing to twist the focusing ring - it worked
> fine again - I guess that little bump knocked it out of alignment.
> George
>
Same story here with my 28-135 IS.
"F. Craig Callahan" wrote:
>
> Thomas Bantel wrote:
>
> > While, with an extension tube, the nominal max aperture communicated
> > to the lens will not change, the effective max aperture will. So this
> > means, an extension tube will not prevent the camera from *trying*
> > to AF, but it will l
Thomas Bantel wrote:
> While, with an extension tube, the nominal max aperture communicated
> to the lens will not change, the effective max aperture will. So this
> means, an extension tube will not prevent the camera from *trying*
> to AF, but it will lower the efficiency of AF just like usin
In a message dated 1/17/01 11:28:27 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< As I
futzed with it the focusing ring suddenly seemed to "break free".
I figured "Now I've done it!" But it did focus, apparently properly (I am
awaiting the return of a test roll), and now turns with
Mike,
What shooting mode are you in? I found in AI Servo you can manually touch up
but it refocuses on it's own right away. Try One Shot and see if the problem
goes away.
--Ian
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
ht
Bob Talbot wrote:
>
> > Therefore, while technically the aperture does not
> > change, for metering and AF purposes the "effective aperture" does
> > change, since less light reaches the sensors. Since with AF what
> > matters is the amount of light that reaches the sensors (no?),
>
> Mmmm...
>
> "why would an extension tube change the aperture?".
It's the same skool of exelence (sp?) that teaches that focal length
varies with film format ;o)
*
***
***
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*http://w
Wondering if anyone had this experience, or an explaination. I used
my new 28-135 in autofocus (on EOS3 mostly), until a situation
called for manual touchup. I could turn the focusing ring only with
difficulty, but it did turn. Since this seemed unlikely I tried more
manual focusing, and even c
"F. Craig Callahan" wrote:
> Since with AF what matters is the amount of
> light that reaches the sensors (no?), an extension tube could have an affect on
> AF performance. Correct? No?
Yes and no. It's not just the amount of light that matters, a larger aperture makes
it easier for the camer
l Message -
From: "Bob Talbot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: EOS 28-135 IS "macro"
>
> Arrg
>
> Not again!
>
>
> An extension tube
Therefore, while technically the aperture does not
> change, for metering and AF purposes the "effective aperture" does
change, since
> less light reaches the sensors. Since with AF what matters is the
amount of
> light that reaches the sensors (no?),
Mmmm...
I'm not sure: I expect it is a func
Marco Kost wrote:
> When I go backpacking, I take always all may EOS stuff with me,
>
> I always feel very limited when using a backpack the size a Nature
> Trekker or similar has. So my solution: I take a really big backpack
> (e.g. Gregory Katmai) which has a large zipper on the front for fas
Hi,
> > What do you take for backpacking, then?
Fcc wrote:
> Trips where photography is the primary goal are a different ballgame.
> So far these have been limited to day trips, since I lack the
> wherewithal to haul both my camera gear and my camping gear at the
> same time--it seems to me tha
Bob Talbot wrote:
> Arrg
>
> Not again!
>
>
> An extension tube DOES NOT change the aperture.
> If it really was f4 before; it remains f4.
>
Ok Bob, calm down. :-)
I wasn't writing in a technical sense (indeed, I made a half-hearted effort not
to get caught up in this issue
Curt Hagenlocher wrote:
> What do you take for backpacking, then?
To date, for trips where photography was not the primary goal, I have taken
either an A-1 or a T-70 and a light, compact Tokina SZ-X 28-105/3.5~4.8. The A-1
was really heavier than I would have liked for that particular use, and
Just to add my humble two cents here, but I have the 28-135IS and find it
exceptionally sharp. I often wonder why I bother taking along my 85 1.8 and
50 1.8 because the 28-135 is so sharp and versitile. There are cases where
faster is obviously better, but usually in the 28-135 range, I'm not
s
ut it certainly has its
uses and has snuggled in right there next to all my "L" gear.
All the best,
Robbi
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 09:36:17 -0800
From: VK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EOS 28-135 IS sharpness
Hello all,
In the fall of 2000 I was enrolled in a B&W phot
Tapani Tarvainen WROTE:
That is strange. I have never used an Elan IIe so I can't say how well
it works with it, but after reading your note I dug up the lens, tube
and every EOS body I could find, namely EOS 3, EOS 5 and EOS 300 and
tried it with all of them, and none could focus even remotely u
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 09:55:32AM -0800, Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter) wrote:
> > One nice thing to consider, an extention tube gets you closer
> > and with IS you can actually handhold the lens and get some nice
> > macro shots without a lot of setup. And for those worried about
> > AF, even wit
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 12:07:33PM -0500, F. Craig Callahan wrote:
>
>
> "Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" wrote:
>
> > One nice thing to consider, an extention tube gets you closer
> > and with IS you can actually handhold the lens and get some nice
> > macro shots without a lot of setup. And for
> It is likely that this is because the extension tubes don't "tell"
the body
> about their presence the way the extenders do, so the AF system
doesn't "know"
> that it's working at f/8 (at the long end).
Arrg
Not again!
An extension tube DOES NOT change the aperture.
If it re
F. Craig Callahan wrote:
"Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" wrote:
> One nice thing to consider, an extention tube gets you closer
> and with IS you can actually handhold the lens and get some nice
> macro shots without a lot of setup. And for those worried about
> AF, even with an Elan IIe and a 25
> That said, I personally would never buy the 28-135 IS--it is simply
> too slow for my way of working, IS or no IS, and it is too big and
> heavy to use as a backpacking lens. Also, I don't much care for the
> IS effect in the viewfinder, although I suppose one gets accustomed
> to it.
What do y
Hello all,
In the fall of 2000 I was enrolled in a B&W photo 1A class. I had just
replaced my 28-105 with the 28-135 IS. The day after printing some
enlargements from the 28-135 IS I stopped by the lab to pick up the now
dry prints. The instructer who was supervising that eve's class (all
pho
"Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" wrote:
> One nice thing to consider, an extention tube gets you closer
> and with IS you can actually handhold the lens and get some nice
> macro shots without a lot of setup. And for those worried about
> AF, even with an Elan IIe and a 25mm extention tube, AF st
Ken Durling wrote:
> OK, first time I've heard this comment - everybody else seems very
> enthusiastic about this lens. Don't want to start a flame war, but
> what gives?
Hi Ken,
My suggestion would be to try out this lens before buying, if at all possible.
As you suggest, different folks ha
Ken Durling wrote:
Could I ask for a brief expalanation? I've heard so much about the
28-135 IS lens that I was trying one out in a store today. (very nice
handling lens) I noticed that on the focusing ring at the .5 meter
end it says "Macro," and that the focusing window also has a macro
ran
You're right on the image ratio, I think, I was just estimating from
images I had taken. But the 75-300 IS front element definitely does
rotate. It is of the micromotor persuasion.
Skip
--
Shadowcatcher Imagery
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
*
***
--- Skip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Macro, in this case, is a marketing term. It
> produces images slightly
> better than 1/2 life size, so I guess that counts.
Are you refering to the 28-135IS? The only Canon lens
that I know that offers 1/2 life size is the 50mm
macro. All others are approx
Darrell Dorsey wrote:
>
> AFAIK, the 75-300 is the only non ring USM IS lens in the line.
> > I think the 28-135 is a great lens, I've gotten some great results from
> > it, and not just because of the IS.
> > Skip
>
> Skip,
>
> There are many more Micro-motor USM lenses than the 75-300USM. Mo
But none of these are IS, as Skip was referring to
Tom P.
- Original Message -
From: "Darrell Dorsey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: EOS 28-135 IS "macro"
> AFAIK, the 75-300 is t
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
