Review on 📸 Canon 2562A002 EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Standard Zoom Lens: Ideal for Canon SLR Cameras by Brian Nelson

The first thing that struck me when I received this lens was the poor build quality. When spending a few hundred dollars on a lens, I expect the mechanical parts to behave as if they were built to tight tolerances. If a lens clearly does not meet these high standards, I return it. I returned two copies of this lens. I've given up for now and have come to the conclusion that Canon's quality control, at least for this particular lens, has gone completely haywire. The main build quality issue is how the zoom mechanism works. When you turn the zoom ring on a well-built zoom lens, it moves fairly easily without binding, but shows some resistance throughout the range and doesn't move on its own at all. On the other hand, if you tilt the lens vertically, it almost hits its maximum zoom setting – not quite, because the last part of the zoom range is much narrower than the first part, but mostly . Thus, the zoom action has too little resistance and extremely inconsistent resistance over most of its range. I've seen this problem on both copies of the lens and the problem was even worse when the filter was in place. To make it even more concerning, this serious lens creep problem is not a constant problem with these lenses. I've read some people online saying they sent these lenses back to Canon for repair (due to unrelated issues) and got back stiff lenses that worked properly. This suggests that Canon has very patchy quality control on these lenses and they just don't care to fix the problem. This is deeply disturbing. The problem with lens flare isn't just that the lens can change focus on you without your intention; it also means that the lens is subjected to a lot of wear and tear during normal use. For example, if you take it off the camera and put it in your pocket, it gets to the end of the telephoto range every time. If you tilt the camera down, it moves. Any time it moves uncontrollably, there is likely to be stress on various parts inside the lens, and it is almost guaranteed that the life expectancy of the lens will be reduced compared to a lens that moves less frequently. I have used Canon lenses for many years including a wide range of EF and EF-s lenses. I've never seen anything come close to this level of lens sloppiness in either of them. It's just unacceptably low build quality. From what I've seen, I'd recommend anyone considering these lenses to go with the 24-105 instead. This is a much, much better lens. I'm not talking about a small difference here. Compared to him, 28-135 looks like a toy. I terribly miss the extra range I used to get with my 17-85 on a crop lens, but don't bother with such a sloppy lens. I guess I'll just have to wait for the 28-135 II rumors and hope Canon gets the build quality right a second time around.