Canon Walkabout lens

beezer123

beezer123

Messages
186
Name
Peter Mitchell
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm on the lookout for a new walkabout lens. I have a range of different lenses covering a pretty decent variation of lengths and speeds, but I would love one that I can take on travels and not worry about having to swap out every time I want to change what I'm shooting.

My last holiday I took the nifty 50 and shot the entire holiday through that, but at times it was too tight.

I've set my sights on the 24-105mm f4 L, but would definitely be open to any suggestions that may suit my needs better.

My range of lenses at the moment are

Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6
Yongnuo 35mm f2 which isn't great
Canon 50mm f1.8 ii
Sigma 55-200mm f4-5.6 DC
Canon 18-55mm lens


The lens I'm looking to buy would be used on a Canon 60D so crop sensor if that makes any difference to the choices or suggestions.

Cheers
 
The 24-105 won't be very wide on your 60D so it may limit you. For a crop sensor, a walkabout range would normally be around 17-50 so generally you've got the Canon 17-55, Tamron 17-50 or Sigma equivalent.

I used the Tamron 2.8 on my Canon kit for Weddings/Portraits/Landscapes and it's an excellent all round lens.
 
On my 450D I seemed to favor the Canon 18-55 2.8 is efs. And they seemed to work well together.
 
Last edited:
The 17-50mm certainly looks like a good shout. I had considered potentially looking into getting a full frame Canon in the not too distant future, but I guess I could hold off on that for another year or so until I'm a bit more skilled and could put it to best use.
 
mazdaman said:
18-135 maybe? Canon have a £50 cashback offer at the moment there is the old variant of this lens still for sale have a look on Camerapricebuster for current pricing

https://store.canon.co.uk/canon-ef-s-18-135mm-f-3-5-5-6-is-usm-lens/1276C005/
Click to expand...

I use this lens as a general walkabout on a 550D (also crop of course). It's short enough for general landscape, long enough for wildlife (so long as the small birds are quite close), light enough not to be a nuisance and seems to have pretty good IS. It's not up to the quality of the Tamron 17-50 I use when I go out specifically to take landscape, armed with tripod etc, but it's thrown in my rucksack and used handheld on the moors. I wouldn't stop it down past f8, but it is and probably always will be my most used lens.
 
Jannyfox said:
I use this lens as a general walkabout on a 550D (also crop of course). It's short enough for general landscape, long enough for wildlife (so long as the small birds are quite close), light enough not to be a nuisance and seems to have pretty good IS. It's not up to the quality of the Tamron 17-50 I use when I go out specifically to take landscape, armed with tripod etc, but it's thrown in my rucksack and used handheld on the moors. I wouldn't stop it down past f8, but it is and probably always will be my most used lens.
Click to expand...

^second the above. The STM version of the 18-135 is good value for money at around £250/260 if you can find one at that price and the Tamron non-vc 17-50 that I bought recently, is impressive for similar money. Keep an eye on http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Canon/Canon-EF-S-lenses/Canon-EF-S-18-135mm-f3.5-5.6-IS-STM-Lens
 
If you don't need the lens to be wide, your original choice is a fine one, especially if you are considering moving to full frame at some point.
 
I would echo comments; 18-135 STM is an excellent choice (at least in my opinion and experience)
 
Bebop said:
What about the EF-S 15-85mm? It's equivalent to about 24-135mm on full frame. I reckon mine is almost as good as my 16-28 f/2.8 II L lens which I use on my full frame.
Click to expand...
GeeJay57 said:
Canon EF-s 15-85mm all day long.
Click to expand...
Vertigo1 said:
This. Best all-round walkabout lens for a crop, end of. Used to own one myself.
Click to expand...

I really cannot stress enough how right these posters are. 24-105 is too long at the low end, so you have a 10-22 to cope with the wide end.
I bought a 15-85 for my son's 550D and it's a stunning lens, truly perfect range for a walkabout on a crop camera and the quality of the images is very, very good. And that's comparing to my L lenses on a 5D mk3
 
24-105 is a great walk about lens on a full frame DSLR, it is one of the ones I use myself. It maybe a but long at the short end on a crop sensor though. Perhaps on a crop something like a 17-55 would be better.
 
Thanks for all the replies folks, some great suggestions in here.

I've decided to go for the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 as I felt that after thinking of the subjects I normally shoot, it's probably best suited for my needs.

If I do need anything beyond the 50mm then it's not too major a deal for me to carry around the 55-200.

Cheers again for all the help. Lens arrives tomorrow so will let you know how I get on with it.
 
Good choice fro the price they are, especially backed up with the 55-200.
 
I'd vote for the Canon 15-85, although not fast, it is a cracking good lens with a very usable range for a general purpose walkabout, I've been using mine for five years on my 7D
 
Andrew Moore said:
Canon. 17-55 f2.8.. simply the best lens for EFS you can get. Sharper than 17-40L when I had them. New they are about £650 mind.. second hand perhaps £350
Click to expand...

The 17-55 is another stunning EF-S which I also used to own. If you need the constant f/2.8 aperture then it's a no-brainer but, if you don't, then the 15-85 is better in pretty much every other way. More range, noticably better build quality and marginally better image quality even. It just lacks the f/2.8 but that's not important to many.
 
Vertigo1 said:
The 17-55 is another stunning EF-S which I also used to own. If you need the constant f/2.8 aperture then it's a no-brainer but, if you don't, then the 15-85 is better in pretty much every other way. More range, noticably better build quality and marginally better image quality even. It just lacks the f/2.8 but that's not important to many.
Click to expand...
The 15-85 is softer than bag of sheep wool. I wouldn't say it's sharp st all, barely any sharper than the average kit lens.
 
Last edited:
Vertigo1 said:
Sorry but that's nonsense. Every review heaps praise on this lens and mine was sharp as a tack. You must have had a bad one.

Direct comparison with 17-55. 15-85 is marginally sharper:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=2
Click to expand...
Mine was made of cheese and lasted all of about 2 weeks before it went. It was a short relationship, they say often the short ones are the best but in this case that couldn't have been further from the truth.
 
Andrew Moore said:
Mine was made of cheese and lasted all of about 2 weeks before it went. It was a short relationship, they say often the short ones are the best but in this case that couldn't have been further from the truth.
Click to expand...

To be fair Photozone did mention there were QC issues so there could well be bad ones out there but, providing you get a good one, it's a stellar lens.

I loved both my 15-85 and 17-55. Both sold as I'm totally full-frame these days but that's the only reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top