Walkaround lens for DSLR

BeautifulLoser

I'm about to step into the world of DSLRs and plunge for the 400d.
The trouble is I just don't know what lens to go for.

I want and can afford only one lens and don't envisage getting another for quite some time.

I've narrowed it down to 2 but am open to persuasion..

Canon EF Zoom Lens - 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (€450)
or
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (€400 (550-150 Canon cash back offer)).

I'd want to use it mainly for family/holiday photos as well as landscapes.

I know some people say that the EF-S mightn't be around for too long but I don't plan on upgrading the camera or selling the lens until I've got my money's worth from it.

Can anyone offer some advice? Any help would be much appreciated..

Fajitas!

Ef-S will be around for a long time. Canon have invested too much into it to drop it. Don't worry about that. The 10-22 and 17-55 are some top rated glass for a reason.

I'd go for the 17-85. Get's good results, has a nice amount of zoom, and has a good wide end - the 28mm on the 28-135mm becomes just under a 50mm...So you don't have much of a wide end on that at all. And if I remember correctly, the IS on the 17-85 is that bit better than the 28-135.

Check out www.Fredmiranda.com for reviews

latchiko

I've got the 17-85mm (also on the 400D) and I'm very happy with it as a walkaround lens. If you are going to be using it for landscapes then the wide end of the 17-85 is probably more suited to you than the added zoom of the 28-135.

rymus

Fajitas! wrote:

Ef-S will be around for a long time.

You hope! It's all about the conspiracy theory tbh

Welcome to boards you beautiful loser you, get the 17-85. Mabye also treat yourself to a 50 1.8. You know it makes sense...

PaulieC

There is also this. It's quite new and I haven't seen any reviews on it yet, but it's a huge zoom range and the OS would help a lot with the handholdability.

RichyX

Or you could have just bought a Pentax SLR and had image stabilization on any lens

mathias

In my opinion image stabilisation is not all its cracked up to be , and as mentioned , I find it pretty bad on the 28-135 to the extent that I leave it turned off , it softens every shot.

From your original 2 choices the 17 -85 is the best option , you need at least 17 on the wide end for any kind of decent landscape shots on a 1.6 crop like the 400D.

Also , 17 -85 is essentially a 5 x zoom. thats about as far as you want to go zoom wise on SLR lenses.
Big zooms like the 18 200 mentioned invariably have major image quality issues at the extremes of the travel. Maybe someone will make a good one someday but I doubt it. Best to cover the range with multiple lenses.

City-Exile

The IS on my 300mm F/2.8 is incredible!
Far better, I feel, than anyone had cracked it up to be!

mathias

Ah but the 300mm F/2.8 is incredible anyway , IS or no , how much does the IS improve things ? At that range you may see a benefit , but theres none ( in my humble opinion ) , on the shorter focal lengths.

RichyX

From using IS on my K100D over the last few months with a variety of lens (well, 3 anyway...), I can say it makes quite a big difference.

It may be a different method to the optical stabilization on the lenses mentioned, but it results in consistently sharper shots under conditions that would usually result in blurred shots.

Consistently sharp shots at 70mm at 1/10 sec.

digitalbeginner

rymus wrote:

...get the 17-85. Mabye also treat yourself to a 50 1.8. You know it makes sense...

I second that emotion.

You'd be surprised how the f1.8 can improve key aspects of your photography (much shorter dof, faster shutter speeds, great quality due to the fact the lens elements only have to focus, not zoom). If memory serves me correct the max aperture on the 17-85 IS is only f4, it's a great lens but the 50mm gets you just over 2 stops shorter dof with its f1.8.

I've heard that the 50mm can be got for less than €90 online. Not sure where though,

Dave

SOL

First i'd say nikon but since that isn't the point I'd definitely go for the 17-85, if you leave yourself with 28 as your widest walk around you will be wanting to change you lense in a few months....

City-Exile

digitalbeginner wrote:

I've heard that the 50mm can be got for less than €90 online. Not sure where though,

Dave

Loads of places!
Half the people on this forum have one, which they've bought from Kea Photo, URGalaxy or Kerso, on eBay.

I got mine from Kerso, for €88.

Glowing

I have the 17-85 - quite like it apart from the weight! I find its quite heavy to hold in one place for any period of time, my wrist aches!

Apart from that, i like being able to use the full zoom without needing a tripod (most of the time). It would drive me mad carrying around a 200mm lens and not being able to grab and shoot ....

Edit: You don't notice how useful the IS is until you switch it off!

leakd

You might want to consider a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. It has a fairly high aperture and from what I heard from reviews, the lens is very sharp. It might not be enough on the wide side, but a proper 10-22 or so wideangle is always a great investment itself (if you have the money, of course). I just ordered my Tamron today from a German site and I paid about €280, although you can get it from €250 off eBay.

m_stan

latchiko wrote:

I've got the 17-85mm (also on the 400D) and I'm very happy with it as a walkaround lens. If you are going to be using it for landscapes then the wide end of the 17-85 is probably more suited to you than the added zoom of the 28-135.

I also have this pairing and would recommend it highly. In fact I'm so precious about the lens I've ordered a polarising filter to protect the glass. IS is great. Excellent walkaround lens - great all rounder.

mathias

Whatever lens you choose I would point out these facts before choosing an IS lens over a standard one and paying the ( considerable in some cases ) extra cash.

If you take mostly landscape photos and your camera is almost always on a tripod, then image stabilization will not help you nor is it needed (in fact, most digital cameras require you to turn image stabilization OFF when placing the camera on a tripod).

If you take pictures mostly outdoors in sunny situations, or in studios with controlled lighting, you will almost always be using a shutter speed appropriate for the focal length -- and so image stabilization is not needed.

Image Stabilization will NOT negate the effect of subject movement. Since IS only counters the effect of camera shake, it does not counter blurriness caused by subject movement.

These points need to be noted as some ( if not most ) camera shops/assistants will tell you otherwise. ( hence my " not all its cracked up to be" comment ).

On the other hand ,

If you like to take pictures indoors in low-light situations where the subject is not moving, image stabilization is somewhat useful.

If you like to take pictures at long focal lengths (telephoto shots) and hand hold your camera, image stabilization is useful to help reduce the likelihood of blurred images due to camera shake.

This is as far as IS goes. ( to date at least )

BeautifulLoser

Thanks to everyone who posted responses!!

I just ordered my Tamron today from a German site

Leakd, was that German site you ordered from DigitalWonderWorld?

I've been looking at this kit from there.

It's a good deal from my shopping around -

EOS400D Body
+
Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS USM
+
BG-E3 (grip)

for €1,264.84


The site has gotten very polaric reviews from some people. Really good and really bad.

The power supply would be european (no big deal) and the manual German (they give you a link to download an English version).

A lot of the negative reviews seem to be old (about a previous incarnation of this company) and about slowness (which I'm not too worried about).

Hmmm. It is a lot of money..and I do tend to procrastinate...

Fireman

I have ti 17/85 and it is a very good all round lens wide enough for landscape and group shots and a very good zoom for those close up shots and the IS is excellent at slow shutter speeds it make up for the aperture of other lens

Fireman

leakd

BeautifulLoser wrote:

Thanks to everyone who posted responses!!



Leakd, was that German site you ordered from DigitalWonderWorld?

I've been looking at this kit from there.

It's a good deal from my shopping around -

EOS400D Body
+
Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS USM
+
BG-E3 (grip)

for €1,264.84


The site has gotten very polaric reviews from some people. Really good and really bad.

The power supply would be european (no big deal) and the manual German (they give you a link to download an English version).

A lot of the negative reviews seem to be old (about a previous incarnation of this company) and about slowness (which I'm not too worried about).

Hmmm. It is a lot of money..and I do tend to procrastinate...

The site was actually essential-systems.de. They are the cheapest for the Tamron on geizhals.at (German/Austrian price comparison site) and got very good reviews. I have good experiences with them, I bought a 50mm f/1.8 for about €90. (You might want to consider the 50mm as a second lens, because it is very sharp and cheap. Because it's a prime lens, however, it might not be a great walk-around lens.)

BeautifulLoser

Thanks again to all who responded. Got my Camera yesterday (from warehousexpress in the end - same price but for uk/ireland).

Now, for those who said they have the same kit (400D and EF-S 17-85 IS), can you recommed a carry case that can snuggly fit the camera with the grip and lens attached? Ideally I'd like the smallest possible bag for my needs. That way I can talk myself out of buying more lenses - because they don't fit in the bag!

digitalbeginner

BeautifulLoser wrote:

Ideally I'd like the smallest possible bag for my needs. That way I can talk myself out of buying more lenses - because they don't fit in the bag!

Some hope

Dave

elven

Ah, there is still hope in the world

I love having a two lens kit...

BL, just take your camera into a shop and try a few of the bags out that way. Gunns actually has a lot of the lowepro ones for as cheap as they are online.

Now, they just need to invent a sexy black & purple velvet one that looks like a handbag and has space for lipstick & purse as well, and I'll be sorted!!!

Paulw

elven wrote:

Now, they just need to invent a sexy black & purple velvet one that looks like a handbag and has space for lipstick & purse as well, and I'll be sorted!!!

You're not asking for much.

Maybe you can email Lowepro and ask for a customised bag. I'm sure they'll do it for you ..... for a fee.

LowePro are some of the best bags available. Very sturdy, and the rain covers are brilliant. The Slingshot bags are very easy to use. Anything from the 100 to the 300 bag. I have the 300 and it's brilliant. I can fit almost all my lenses and stuff inside.

For you, the Slingshot 100AW should be enough. Try them out. I got mine in the city, and it was almost the same price as buying online.

Seán_B

The Sigma 24-70 f2.8 is a super walkaround lens.

leakd

I think a Lowepro SlingShot 100 (or 200, if you like it bigger) would be just the right thing for you. It is small, can be carried as a backpack and you can access your camera by turning the bag.

rabbitinlights

I have the Lowepro TLZ 1:

http://www.lowepro.com/Products/Toploading/classic/Topload_Zoom_1.aspx

Its great for your lens and camera, its also small enough to put inside a rucksack if needed? I also had the Slingshot 100, but found it to be annoying if I was going out for the day as it only holds the camera, not room for a drink bottle or some food, so id end up carriing 2 bags, which is pointless?

S.

Ive had the 17-85mm for nearly 3 years now and Its amazing, its rarely off my camera, the one piece of advice id give you is get the hood for it, its a pretty big piece of glass at the front, and the hood has saved mine loads of times, its bloody annoying that it didnt come with it though.