Amadeus Loc: New York

I'm new here folks so bear with me. I recently stepped up to a Canon 80D from my old 40D. But I kept my old 28-135 lens. The old lens is fine but just wondering if it is worth it to get the newer 18-135. Am I losing a lot staying with the old lens, besides the wider angle. Also the 18-135 comes with 2 different motors, USM and STM. I know the difference, but just wanted to know of any opinions on choice of motors. I take mostly stills, but do take some videos with the 80D.
Thanks

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

As noted, the 18-135 gives you the wider 24mm equivalent field of view. The IS is more effective, down to 2- or 3-stops. You might find the lens is sharper. The 28-135 is sharp enough with IS support. All things considered, you'd be buying the new lens for the wider end, not for any great difference or improvement in image quality.

Amadeus Loc: New York

I appreciate the reply. I'm 71 and enhanced IS appeals to me. :) I'm thinking seriously of getting the newer 18-135. It seems the STM is the newer technology. Anyone have an opinion on that issue?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The STM versions are newer in that they're quieter, but not necessarily any "better" in AF responsiveness, although "stepped" motors as technology are actually older than ultrasonic motors for AF control & lens design. The STM lenses are now being released for video. If you don't use a seperate mic, the mic on the camera body will pickup the sound of the AF motor as the lens focuses with USM motors being overall louder. The STM lenses are much quiet and better for video, especially when not using an external mic.

jdub82 Loc: Northern California

The newest Canon 18-135 mm is the USM version. It is a newer version of USM technology, sometimes referred to as "Nano USM." I have this lens and it stays on my 77D a large portion of the time. Focusing is fast and quiet, and produces sharp images. I highly recommend it!

Amadeus Loc: New York

Thank you. I think i will get the USM version. I shoot a lot of a granddaughter in gymnastics. I think the USM is better for those situations. The little quicker focusing would be a plus for me.
Thanks again for all your input.

LXK0930 Loc: Souh Jersey

Note that the 18-135 provides a wide focal length of approx 28mm, not 24mm.

If the 24mm is important to you, this is not the right lens.

machia Loc: NJ

The 18-135mm ( 28.8-216mm ) is a fabulous lens. The STM is almost silent as it auto-focuses. The USM is a newer USM Canon design which I hear good things about. Lightweight and compact, when I travel this lens does the job.

jdub82 Loc: Northern California

On his 80D crop sensor camera, the 18-135mm lens will give him a much wider view than his current 28mm - 135mm lens. I'm certainly not aware of any zoom lens which provides a wider angle than 18mm and also covers the focal length up to 135mm. Yes, I am aware that the equivalent of 18mm on a crop sensor is 28mm. That would also mean his current 28mm - 135mm lens is the equivalent of about 38mm at the widest.

Amadeus Loc: New York

Yes I do gain on the wide angle side and that's a plus also.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

There have been three EF-S 18-135mm IS lens, the original and oldest version uses a micro motor to auto focus.

The two versions that followed.... STM and finally the USM version... use a somewhat improved optical formula. It's the same in these two later versions, but different from the original. There are some differences in image quality which you can see for yourself here: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=678&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=809&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0

Bryan's magnified test shots at that site appear to show a little bit better contrast and slight improvement in sharpness.... though to me it doesn't appear to be a lot.

For video, you would probably prefer the STM or USM version which are both faster, quieter and smoother focusing than the original micro motor version.

For still photography, Canon claims the latest USM version focuses 2X to 4X faster than the STM version (which in turn is faster than the micro motor version). If you shoot action such as sports or wildlife, you might prefer the USM lens for it's faster acquisition of focus and better tracking of moving subjects.

The EF-S 18-135mm USM also is the first Canon lens to use what they call "Nano USM", which is a hybrid form of focus drive which is also good for videography because like STM it is quiet and smooth running. ("Regular" USM used on many other lenses may not be ideal for video.)

In addition, the EF-S 18-135mm USM is the only Canon lens that can be fitted with the optional PZ-E1 Power Zoom module ($149), which might be useful for videography.

In comparison, the EF 28-135mm IS USM is a hold-over from the days of film. It's actually a very good lens. It was fitted in kit to many of the DSLR models a few years ago, so there are a lot of them around. I've used several copies myself and still have 2 of them and know of several pros who use it. I've found the 28-135 to be equal in image quality, performance and durability to some of the more expensive L-series lenses, such as the original EF 24-105L. I haven't tried the 24-105L II, so can't say, but I've been given the impression that the image quality didn't change much, that the newer version of that lens primarily got a helpful upgrade to its IS system, plus the new version uses Nano USM (as described above).

Canon finally discontinued the 28-135mm within the past year or two, but they are widely available used. Compare the image quality produced by the 28-135 with the 18-135 here: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1045&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=116&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=6&APIComp=1

I usually have a lot of faith in the results Bryan shows. His tests usually confirm what I see with lenses I've used. However, that's not the case with the 28-135mm. His test shots done with it seem to show corner softness at the wide end of the 28-135mm... at the 28mm and 35mm zoom settings. My experience with multiple copies of this lens have all tended to show just the opposite.... fine quality at the wide end and some softness only all the way out at the 135mm end of the zoom, which largely disappears when the lens is stopped down slightly. His 135mm test shots at f/5.6 just seem to show some loss of contrast in the center.

Note: I use compared lenses on 7DII in one case at that web site and on 60D in the other case. I don't think it matters much, so long as the same camera or cameras with relatively similar sensors are used in the head-to-head comparison. I also only looked at comparisons using the "wide open" apertures of the lenses, since those are the "worst" with most lenses.

It's a hard call in your case... I often recommend a 28-135mm as an inexpensive but reasonably compact and good performing "walk around" lens. It has good image quality, fast USM focus drive and helpful USM (though it's the type that needs to be shut off if using the lens locked down on a tripod). It's not wide on one, but I really like it on an APS-C sensor camera in particular (and I'm often also carrying an EF 20mm f/2.8, Tokina 12-24mm or an EF-S 10-22mm anyway, if I need something wider). Using it on an APS-C camera crops away some of the "weaker" portions of the image area (such as some vignetting it shows on full frame at the wide end).

However, you mention shooting video (which I don't do with my DSLRs) and many folks prefer an STM or Nano USM lens for that. So the EF-S 18-135 STM or USM might be a better choice for you. Between the two of them, no worries about image quality (they're identical).... It's more a matter whether you shoot action and need the faster focusing and better movement tracking of the USM... Or if you want the option to fit the Power Zoom module that's exclusive to the USM version.... And if those two advantages of the USM verision of the lens are worth the extra cost to you. (Usually the 80D is sold in kit with the USM version of the lens, I think.... at least that's the case with the Canon assembled kits. Retailers putting kits together might substitute the cheaper STM or even the micro motor version.)

Other lenses you may want to consider:

EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.... Larger f/2.8 aperture would be better for low light shooting conditions. Image quality is top notch, as well as having IS and fast USM focusing. It is not "Nano USM" though, so may not be ideal for video work (same as your 28-135). It also has a more limited range of focal lengths, which is typical of larger aperture zooms (an f/2.8 18-135mm would need to be very large and heavy).

EF-S 15-85mm IS USM... Wider than most of the walk-around lenses, which can be nice if you need it. 15mm versus 17 or 18mm doesn't sound like a lot of difference, but it is. One or two millimeters don't make a noticeable difference with telephotos, but they sure do with wide angles! If you have a wider lens now, it may not be needed, but this lens also has excellent image quality, helpful IS and fast USM. Once again though, it's not "Nano USM".

Between them all, you probably need to consider any other lenses you might have in your kit, and how any of these would dovetail with those to cover focal lengths you use a lot.

Hope this helps!

Edit: Folks, PLEASE stop citing full frame equivalents. 28mm is 28mm, 18mm is 18mm, 135mm is 135mm, etc., regardless of sensor format. There's really no need to "do the math" for sake of comparison. The original poster is fully aware that his 28-135mm "isn't wide" on his 80D.... exactly the same as it wasn't wide on his 40D (same APS-C format). "Full frame equivalents" only confuse things and serve no purpose.(Especially when you do the math incorrectly. A 28-135mm on a Canon APS-C camera is roughly equal to a 45-216mm zoom on full frame, if there were such a thing.... Canon APS-C uses a 1.6X multiplier).

The only time that it's helpful to "do the math" is when changing sensor formats, which the original poster isn't doing.

JCam Loc: MD Eastern Shore

I'm just a month short of 80 and have been using the 18-135 mm Canon f/ 3.5- 5.6 lens that came with the camera and have no complaints except that it doesn't have enough 'reach'; I solved that with a Tamron 70-300 mm which gives me an effective 460 mm with my Can 60D. I have no need for another but have heard the can be usually found at KEH at a good price.

Amadeus Loc: New York

All of what you folks have said here is very helpful. The most important thing for me is the faster focusing capability of the USM so I am going ahead in that direction. Thank you all for your input. I've only been here a week or so, but the articles are great and so is the advice. Thank you all again. And JCam, I also have the Tamron 70-300.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Just to add another option, I have the Sigma 18-300mm (currently $399 new) on my 80D. I love it. People say it isn't the best image quality, but I find it pretty sharp! Note the chin whiskers on the attached photo. That is at 300mm where people say it is soft! A zoom lens that goes even farther out for a few bucks more is the Tamron 18-400 ($649 new)

(Download)

RichardSM Loc: Back in Texas

Actually none of it is true the 18-135mm is what it is what you use on the APC-S is the center focus of the lens
Remember it the (FOV) Field of View. 18mm is 18 mm and 135mm is what it is 135mm. I dislike the term it’s wider and so on?