Mike Holmes Loc: The Villages Fl

I am looking to purchase a lens for my canon 90d to use as my primary lens. I am primarily a wildlife photographer and have a canon EF 50 1.8 prime lens and a canon 100-400 l ii with a 1.4 extender which is my wildlife lens. I am debating purchasing either a canon EF 24-105 f4 l is usm lens for $450 used or a EF 28-135 f3.5-5.6 is usm lens for $140 used as my primary non wildlife lens. I will use this as my travel and landscape lens. Image quality is an important consideration. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks for your input

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Are you concerned about EF lenses or a general purpose lens best suited to your 90D sensor format? To 'get wide' for general purposes, you need an EF-S lens that starts at 18mm, such as the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS.

If looking for EF lenses, consider the non L version of EF 24-105 IS. It's sharper than the older L version and includes a lock that overcomes an issue affecting many of the older zooms.

Other EF zoom ideas: the EF 17-40L or the EF 16-35 f/4L IS.

The 50 f/1.8 remains a great walkaround, but the crop factor can make is seem a 'little long'. There's also ideas of an EF 24 f/2.8, or EF 35 f/2 IS, or EF 40 f/2.8

jim quist Loc: Missouri

My wife has the 24-105 for her everyday lens on her 5D mk4. She really likes that lens. The other lens she uses is our 400 f4 DO for taking pictures of birds.

Mike Holmes Loc: The Villages Fl

Thanks for your input.I am concerned that the EF-s lenses are not sharp enough. I am assuming that the L lenses are going to be better quality. I have been very happy with the sharpness of my l 100-400. I guess I am looking for the best quality general purpose zoom lens.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Canon has done a great job at marketing their L line. Every lens I suggested is equally sharp or more so. The red ring indicates many things, sometimes just a rugged build rather than comparative sharpness or overall value. The drawback of a 'general purpose' FF lens that starts at 24mm is the equivalent field of view of the crop sensor giving a lens that starts at 38mm.

User ID

Soooo true :-(

I have quite a mix in both formats and superior IQ is NOT an L-series parameter. My own observation is that “L” means heavy build, USM focus motor, no size increase when zoomed and no variable max aperture ... nothing more.

What you have there are the necessary assets of an on-the-job tool. Working photographers generally assume “adequate” IQ and need nothing beyond that. Obviously “adequate” varies ... a macro lens and an ultrawide zoom will differ as to what is “adequate”.

User ID

Kinda amusing to read a concern about superior IQ from an APSC user who may be willing to tote a FF lens to assure superior IQ.

If it’s okay to haul that heavy glass around then just use a FF body to match. IQ does not derive from lenses alone. IQ derives from a total system, wisely assembled and skillfully used.

Above is not “FF snobbery”. I prefer smaller gear even tho I use all three common formats. Canon’s version of APSC is only marginally bigger than m4/3 and putting FF lenses on m4/3 bodies is ergonomically pretty silly. AAMOF, although I use EF-s lenses I don’t use them on Canon bodies at all. When using them on m4/3 I don’t mind the 1.25x crop in the least ... more often it’s beneficial:-).

If you choose to tote your 90D instead of your 5D you’re not really lightening your load very well with a FF lens on it.

After much consideration I came to realize that the new (~2016) 18-135 IS USM is Canon’s ideal walk around EF-s offering, limiting the reach to “only” 135 to avoid major IQ compromises. Do check it out ... about $275 used but outrageous as brand new.

Happens that I instead went with the 15-85 instead since I’ll use it on both APSC and on m4/3. And since we hafta chase the eagles offa the front porch I don’t really need a whole lotta reach;-)

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

I am not a pixel peeper and am very happy with my Sigma 18-300mm zoom on my 80D. I find the IQ, even at the long end, more than satisfactory. Check out the photo below. I did re-aim after the auto-focus settled, but was focused on the face. This is one at 210mm.

(Download)

rotated 180°

(Download)

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

I use the Efs 18-200 as my walk around and the 100-400 L when I need more reach. Only problem with the 18-200 is lens creep. It has a lock and I use a lens band. That solves the creep problem The lens can be had for $300 used at KEH.

Mike Holmes Loc: The Villages Fl

Thanks everyone for the feedback!!!! I am going with the canon EF28-135 f3.5/5.6 is usm used from mpb. I know it is a ff but if you don't tell I wont.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

That lens will give you wide angle shots on a full frame camera such as yours, but on a crop sensor 90D, the OP will lose much of the wide end.

miked46 Loc: Winter Springs, Florida

depending where you will be, I use the 10-18mm and 18-135mm

Mike Holmes Loc: The Villages Fl

This has been an interesting, for me, discussion. I am an "old" film guy and relatively new to digital photography. The statement by "chg canon" about L lens marketing by canon is somewhat confirmed by reviews I have read by Ken Rockwell's evaluations of canon lenses. When you look at digital photography, as a hobby, it is not that expensive a hobby compared to other hobbies. Once you have made the initial investment in equipment there is not allot of reoccurring cost. This forum is a valuable tool in the learning process to help develop new users in this hobby. Go UHH. Thanks again!!!

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

As a carry around WEIGHT should be a major factor in selecting a walk around lens.
For example, my walk around lens for my Nikon's used to be the 18-200 on my cropped sensor camera's, I got a field of view of 27-300 mm. The lens was small, light, and compact and covered about 85% of what I needed it to cover. A friend recommended the Nikon 18-300 for an even greater range, but when I attached it to my D500, I found it a LOT heavier than my 18-200 for a walk around lens.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Of the two lenses you are considering I would go with the 24-105mm. That is what I did and because with a crop sensor as I have also 28mm just is not wide at all. 28mm is a FF equivalent to 44mm which is "Normal" and too close to your 50mm. 24 mm at least gives you about 38mm which is a popular FF width for "Street" photography. I would add the 10-18mm to your arsenal and you will have it all covered and that lens is a great little lens for a very reasonable price.
Hope this helps.