Our family took a trip to the park, and we brought along the 7D with this lens. One day, I will have my follow focus, but the focus in a few places was pretty tight. Watch it in 1080p if you can. The slowed footage was originally 720p (60fps), so it isn't as sharp.
Some beutifull pics there guys, but have to say I have had very poor results with this lens and a fiend of mine has 2 of them and he only has kept them for backup for his 24-105. I know that its hit and miss sometimes with lens copies, but I found the autofocus in them to be so unreliable and when I use it on my 5D mark2, it isn't a winning combination for Modern Wedding Photography. I now use the 24-105 which isn't brilliant but its much better. The reason why im giving my 2cents about this is that I think Canon should have replaced this lens a long time ago, such lens's like the efs17-85 and the 15-85 which would be comparable are much better performers in my opinion. I just think Canon should address this because if they brought out a 28-135 mk2 I would most definatelly buy it. What do you guys think?
I really don't see them updating this lens. It's Canon's only current FF-compatible non-L general purpose zoom lens, and 28mm is not wide enough as a general purpose zoom for a 1.6x crop body. If you have a FF body, Canon wants you to buy an L-series zoom for it (e.g. the 24-105mm f/4L IS 'kit lens' for the 5DII), and if you have a 1.6x crop body, Canon makes EF-S lenses for you. The 28-135mm was a good kit lens when it was designed - but that was back in the day when FF was the norm (i.e. film). In effect it was replaced by the EF-S 17-85mm (27-136mm FF-equivalent with a variable aperture), and that lens was recently 'updated' (replaced, in fact, by the EF-S 15-85mm).
The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of bodies that Canon sells are APS-C format, and there's a substantial price gap between APS-C bodies and bodies with larger sensors. If you're in the majority you buy EF-S lenses at shorter focal lengths (and often EF or L lenses in the telephoto range, since EF-S lenses don't really offer much benefit there). If you can afford a FF body, you can probably afford L lenses (or so Canon seems to believe). That's why we're seeing only EF-S and L-series lenses being updated/released, and no recent EF non-L lenses.
I'm thinking about getting mine replaced by the 24-105.
As MK5GTI stated I also had acceptable results only from F8 and above. I won't say it's a bad lens, especially when you think of its price. But when it comes to low light situations the IS helps but it can't do magic.
Still hesitating a little as the 24-70 would be another option, too. It's 2.8 but no IS. The 24-105 has IS but is 4.0. :-\
I recently found one of these in a closet on a Rebel 2000.
Well had to clean the focus ring as the rubber had become all molten, and it works fine, but I agree with others here, not quite the keeper lens, although I can't complain for it being free