450D kit lens upgrade
- Thread starter hashcake
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,854
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi, I'm not sure it's really worth £300 or so to duplicate a lot of the kit lens range, particularly as the kit lens is quite well regarded anyway.
I'd be more inclined to either get a couple of primes (50mm and 85mm perhaps) or get something to extend your range a lot more, like the 70-200 F4L which Kerso have for about £350
I'd be more inclined to either get a couple of primes (50mm and 85mm perhaps) or get something to extend your range a lot more, like the 70-200 F4L which Kerso have for about £350
- Messages
- 3,036
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I had the 17-85 when I bought my first 40D in a kit.
TBH I wasn't that impressed with it. Yes, the lens is an improvement on the 18-55, but IMHO not enough to justify the cost. CA, pincushion and barrel distortion were very evident on the lens I had and traded it in part exchange for a 70-200mm f4L.
I'd be more inclined to keep the kit lens and get your first L lens as jj pearce suggests or perhaps if you really want the 17-85mm range or near enough, go for the Sigma 24-60mm. A chap on here (Andy - Puddleduck) highly recommends it on a different thread..
Cheers, Mark
TBH I wasn't that impressed with it. Yes, the lens is an improvement on the 18-55, but IMHO not enough to justify the cost. CA, pincushion and barrel distortion were very evident on the lens I had and traded it in part exchange for a 70-200mm f4L.
I'd be more inclined to keep the kit lens and get your first L lens as jj pearce suggests or perhaps if you really want the 17-85mm range or near enough, go for the Sigma 24-60mm. A chap on here (Andy - Puddleduck) highly recommends it on a different thread..
Cheers, Mark
- Messages
- 1,461
- Name
- The King Of Prestwich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Get a Sigma 17-70mm - that's the upgrade I've just made, and have not regretted it one bit!! 
OP
hashcake
Gone to pot!
- Messages
- 5,943
- Name
- Darran, Daz or ****
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hmm, now you've got me thinking!
I've also got a nifty fifty and I'm happy with that as a prime lens and I've got a canon 50-250mm IS lens.
I was basically thinking of a general walkabout lens and I thought the 17-85mm would be a better option for our holiday than the 18-55mm kit lens.
The 17-85mm lens I played with belongs to my stepdaughters hubby and he got it with his 40D.
I only had a little time to play with it indoors and it certainly seemed to improve over the 18-55mm.
I prefer IS lenses as camera shake can be a real pain for me, hence the reason I currently stick with with canon lenses but hopefully this will improve over time.
You've given me food for thought, think I will consider this for a bit longer.
I've also got a nifty fifty and I'm happy with that as a prime lens and I've got a canon 50-250mm IS lens.
I was basically thinking of a general walkabout lens and I thought the 17-85mm would be a better option for our holiday than the 18-55mm kit lens.
The 17-85mm lens I played with belongs to my stepdaughters hubby and he got it with his 40D.
I only had a little time to play with it indoors and it certainly seemed to improve over the 18-55mm.
I prefer IS lenses as camera shake can be a real pain for me, hence the reason I currently stick with with canon lenses but hopefully this will improve over time.
You've given me food for thought, think I will consider this for a bit longer.
- Messages
- 1,461
- Name
- The King Of Prestwich
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But the Sigma 17-70 is a 2.8 lens which means you can hand hold at faster shutter speeds than the kit lens?
- Messages
- 965
- Name
- Dylan
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I upgraded my 18-55 400d kit lens to the 17-85, and loved it. Yes it is a bit slow, but the stablizier more than makes up for that with me. My only upset was when i dropped it 
however shes being fixed now so should be fighting fit again!
The siggy 17-70 seemed to slow and loud for me when focusing, and thats what put me off. The Sigma 24-60 is a good lens from what i have seen, but it may not be wide enough on a crop body.
however shes being fixed now so should be fighting fit again! The siggy 17-70 seemed to slow and loud for me when focusing, and thats what put me off. The Sigma 24-60 is a good lens from what i have seen, but it may not be wide enough on a crop body.
- Messages
- 787
- Name
- James
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I was doing the same upgrade pretty much - I wanted better than the standard 18-55mm that came with my 30D.
I tried the the 17-85 IS and was impressed, but I also tried the Sigma 17-70 (f/2.8-4.5) and the Tamron 17-50 (f/2.8).
I eventually settled on the Tamron, sold by the f/2.8. The larger aperture size allowing for faster shutter speed made up for the IS in my opinion, and also reduces motion blur, which the IS cannot.
Just waiting for it to arrive tomorrow
I tried the the 17-85 IS and was impressed, but I also tried the Sigma 17-70 (f/2.8-4.5) and the Tamron 17-50 (f/2.8).
I eventually settled on the Tamron, sold by the f/2.8. The larger aperture size allowing for faster shutter speed made up for the IS in my opinion, and also reduces motion blur, which the IS cannot.
Just waiting for it to arrive tomorrow