New Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Standard Zoom Lens for Canon DSLR Cameras (White Box) Review

I bought this lens separately, it didn’t come with me in the kit, I made my choice consciously, and over time I got a little disappointed in the purchase, but what it is is what it is. The lens has been serving me for the fourth year already, I mainly use it only for zoom, since it is mediocre at the wide-angle position, the focal lengths that are optimal in terms of sharpness are 24-85mm, I do not recommend using extreme positions, as the sharpness drops. That is, this lens seems to be…

Got pros: Advantages? ! Probably just the cost and the variety of available focal lengths. With these drawbacks: - soap - worse (well, or at least not better, that's for sure) than whale 18-55, a third of the photographs are full of soap, it' it didn't help, maybe I got such a copy, but this does not make it easier for me to understand what's going on here.

Below are some advantages: Lens durability!:) Despite landing on my pavement, he appeared to have suffered just minor injuries.) As well as its cost. Below are some downsides: 1) The phenomenon of chromatic aberration 2) A lack of clarity, which is notably noticeable when the topic is more than seven meters distant. 3) A bit "soapy" The assembly is not very good; everything is hanging off of it)

I'd say it's menacing, get used to keeping a certain distance from the target, and if you run into any issues, switching to manual mode is simple and won't be difficult at all. I am overjoyed to feel this way!

The benefits of it include: It was taken with a 500D, and it flawlessly covers the range of distances between 28 and 110 millimeters. Photos may be produced even at 1/4 and 1/6 of a millimeter. Got cons: There is some noticeable HA and roll at the broad end, but Photoshop makes it quite easy to fix both of these issues, as well as the second and third.

I purchased it to replace the 28-135 because there was no option to get a wide angle lens in addition to that one) and the trunk was outrageously angry at the 28-135 even though of course I want a rapid fix and a telephoto lens in addition to that:) but this lens fulfills the most of my shooting requirements.

My thoughts on the product's value.Its pros: universal, not noisy, the trunk does not fall forward Different cons: all the "charms of the Neelka" are with him, but with the puff it'

In general, it is suitable as a more universal replacement for a whale, Once you get used to it, it turns out to be convenient and versatile.

I managed to hold the lens rather securely without using a tripod, and although I considered focal lengths up to 200, I decided on 135 with a 1.6 crop "behind the eyes." Of course, what we were able to do was: page=5 :

it is necessary to use a sturdy tripod and, if necessary, In the dark, sometimes it focuses poorly - you can use additional illumination with a flashlight or shoot in manual mode. 18 mm is quite enough to shoot landscapes, if not enough, then you can glue a panorama of 2-3 shots, I practically don’t use 135 mm, Ru/users/dukex/albums/

I required a lens that was at the very least comparable to, if not significantly better than, the whale 18-55. At first glance, it appeared as though - wow, how wonderful he is, how wonderful he is! You have the ability to wind the filters, there is a simple focus ring, and (as a result of the proportions), it is much easier to show off in front of the young ladies. But . It's possible that this is the fault of a particular specimen that I came across, but in comparison to a whale, it has the…

I pair it with the Canon 50D. Glass is an amazing lens for its price, and the fact that it covers all of the necessary FRs is what I enjoy best about it (a new one cost me less than 10,000 on the Internet). For every possible situation. Great color reproduction, and outside portraits come across as very luscious and vibrant. Due to the fact that the hole shuts down very quickly when the FR is increased, using it in a dimly lit environment without a flash can be challenging. The focus is…

Theft during a vacation: ( If it weren't for this, I probably would have done more with it. Because of the flaws, I won't be making another purchase. Chromaticity is the most important factor! For the price (today you can find one for 11,000), you can purchase a lens that is fairly adequate for photography. Given 5.6 at a long focus, I used it without UV protection, and it did save a little bit of energy. Pros: The sharpness is substantially sharper, and the lens is lighter than the bulky 18-55

I needed a high-quality alternative to the soap dish, so I purchased it in early August 2022 along with the 550D as a universal lens for all occasions. I made the purchase because I was looking to replace the soap dish. The lens is quite effective at performing its function. It is imperative that we keep in mind that there is no such thing as universal quality or anything else, particularly for such money. If you rely on photography as your primary source of income, you should consider…

Has pros: I bought the price for 6 thousand. I work out my money in full. It lathers a little at 18-24, everything else works well in tandem with a cheap fix 50 mm 1.8 Some cons: It soaps a little at 18-24, everything else is fine, but I would not call this a disadvantage for cheap glass.

The lens was included with the 60D purchase (KIT). I made a conscious decision to go with this particular lens because. Since I upgraded to a DSLR from a 12x ultrazoom, I was looking for a replacement lens with comparable capabilities. I didn't want to burden myself by bringing along a large number of lenses. To a certain extent, content with the lens. With time, I became accustomed to its shortcomings, and as a consequence, I am satisfied with the quality of the photographs it produces…

As a regular lens, I use it with the 500D, and I find that it works perfectly for me. All lenses suffer from these issues to a more or lesser degree; nonetheless, the 18-135 performs fairly well considering its price point, and the most of these issues can be easily fixed in post-production software. I read reviews, and some of them mentioned something called "soap soap." I don't know if these are actual specimens; perhaps the owners have particularly large hands, or perhaps they have very high

It was necessary for me to replace the whale, and there are also 50 1.4 lenses for a cropped 500d. FR is absolutely fantastic! It only draws beautifully at 100 and above, and there is also a beautiful bokeh and quite a sharpness to it! a frequency comparable to that of a whale! The color reproduction is even about comparable to a fifty dollar bill, despite being an order of magnitude better than that of a whale. However, it is very challenging to get the background to blur. In fact, no matter…

I used a K600D whale to take the picture, and afterward, for a very long time and to the fullest extent, I didn't understand what and how it was done, because a buddy of mine who owned an 18-55 told me to use exactly 135 for the exposure. Now, of course, at first it didn't work, but then I began to figure out what and how, and I found that at 135mm I nearly never shoot images at a maximum of 70, with only a few exceptions. I started to grasp the concept of f3.5, but I've found that it's not…

In spite of all of its flaws, this is still a very respectable machine, particularly when considering the price. This is the best lens for learning and further understanding whether you are ready to vote with a for prettier shots. If you want prettier shots, vote with an. Backlash occurs, and over the course of time, a small portion of the trunk falls off, although this does not damage the "quality." I again restate that good images can be taken without using the auto mode and with only a few…