Covering a range from 29mm-216mm in 35mm format, Canon's new EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS offers a winning combination of size, range and features and is a perfect complement to APS-C cameras. With high-quality optics, dedicated image stabilization and more, this new lens promises to be a favorite for EOS users.

• Focal Length & Maximum Aperture: 18-135mm 1:3.5-5.6
• Lens Construction: 16 elements in 12 groups
• Diagonal Angle of View: 74° 20' - 11° 30'
• Focus Adjustment: Inner focusing system
• Closest Focusing Distance: 1.5 ft./0.45m
• Filter Size: 67mm
• Max. Diameter x Length, Weight: 3.0 x 4.0 in./75.4 x 101mm, 16.0 oz./455g

For more info, please check Canon's website directly.

I really like the range of this one. I have been hoping for a lens like this, although I was hoping for a 3.5-4.5. I will be interested to see some reviews.

Where to preorder the 18-135:

B&H
Adorama
Amazon

It seems like an IS version of the 28-200 for EF-S. Less than the 18-200 and only marginally greater than the 17-85. Doesn't have USM. Unless this fixes the terrible CA problems or smearing of the 17-85, this doesn't do anything for me.

It is a cheap kit lens.

EBH

Move along, nothing too see hear.

A basic kit lens with the added interest of IS. It seems Canon will end up with IS in all it's EF-S lenses eventually. Can't see them releasing a in body IS.

+1

EB-1 wrote:
It is a cheap kit lens.

EBH

My fav kit lens is the EF 24-105 4L IS USM. Not cheap but a friggen kit lens.

Gochugogi wrote:

My fav kit lens is the EF 24-105 4L IS USM. Not cheap but a friggen kit lens.


Kit by name, but not by nature; I love mine too.

It seems this lens is the ugly duckling of the recent product announcements... We're still on page one here!

Imagine how different this lens would be if it covered FF sensors...

18-135 f/3.5-4.5 USM IS would be interesting. Lack of USM is as bad as slow aperture.

This lens really got me stumped. I really can't see the wisdom in making this lens. Nothing in this lens stand out whatsoever. FL lost to the 18-200 or Tamron's better offerings, it's not a constant and/or fast aperture, the MTF looks bad and it's not even a USM lens.

Even worse to make it one of the 7D kit options. WTF are they thinking. It has 1000D written all over it.

Well, it is a single lens that does cover (almost) the same focal length range as the kit lens (28-135) that I bought with my 40D and the 17-40 I bought for wide angle coverage and at approximately the same apertures. Still, if I were going to buy an S lens, I think I'd spend the money on the 10-22, not this one.

You'd think that they would give you a better lens as a kit for a camera that is supposed to be in the semi pro market.

It offers the same range as the EF 28-200, though that lens does not have IS.

It's seems likely that they made this lens to be able to offer a lower-cost "step up" option in their mid-range kits in lieu of the (expensive) EF-S 18-200 IS or the (awkward) EF 28-135 IS. It's really a much better kit lens for a mid-range buyer than the old EF 28-135 IS.

If you were choosing a lens separately, I think the new 15-85 or the 17-55 are likely to be the preferred choices.

I just can't believe they'd think a 7D user would want this as a kit lens. How about the 400 f/5.6L as a kit lens

You would be surprised Whayne, I bet they will sell allot of the 7D/18-135 IS kits to people who don't know any better. Look how popular the 20D/30D/40D 18-55 kits were!

At least Canon Australia is offering a variety of kits, from what I've seen, the only kit available in USA is the 28-135 IS kit which IMHO isn't really a useful lens on a crop camera.

n0b0 wrote:
This lens really got me stumped. I really can't see the wisdom in making this lens. Nothing in this lens stand out whatsoever. FL lost to the 18-200 or Tamron's better offerings, it's not a constant and/or fast aperture, the MTF looks bad and it's not even a USM lens.

Well, Nikon's 18-135mm lacks VR (but comes with AF-S). Why make it better than the Nikon counterpart by adding both USM and IS, if you can get away with only IS?

Canon must have forgotten about Nikon's recent 18-105 kitlens, which apart from excellent IQ has both AF-S and VR.

I'm not familiar with Nikon lenses. I assume that AF-S is their version of USM?

I didn't know Nikon has a lens with exactly the same FL. Why Canon wants to copy that still beats the hell outta me. I would prefer that 15-85mm for the wider FL if it was cheaper or a constant f/2.8 lens.