New Canon Walkabout Lens

D

dayleh

Messages
4
Edit My Images
No
Hey guys. Im looking to buy a good all round lens for my 1000D. Ive been looking at the 24-105mm but would it be worth the money on a cropped body? I was thinking more long term for when i eventually upgrade the body. Also, what are good alternatives?

Currently using the 18-55mm kit without IS, 75-300mm f4-5.6, 50mm 1.8.
 
dayleh said:
Hey guys. Im looking to buy a good all round lens for my 1000D. Ive been looking at the 24-105mm but would it be worth the money on a cropped body? I was thinking more long term for when i eventually upgrade the body. Also, what are good alternatives?

Currently using the 18-55mm kit without IS, 75-300mm f4-5.6, 50mm 1.8.
Click to expand...


If, with the 18-55 you often find yourself needing more focal length then you'll like the 24-105. If, however, you find yourself shooting at 18mm a lot then the 17-55 would be an excellent replacement. Then dump the 75-300 and get a 55-250.
 
I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Are you thinking about a future full frame upgrade, and looking to buy EF lenses that will be compatible, or high quality EFS lenses for a crop body. It makes a lot of difference.
 
Forget the 24-105mm on a crop body if you like fitting things in. Its very restrictive as a walkabout on a crop body IMO. Id get a 17-55mm IS F2.8, Its got everything people dream about in a lens except for L series build quality. It is the best walkabout for a crop imo
 
MartynK said:
I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Are you thinking about a future full frame upgrade, and looking to buy EF lenses that will be compatible, or high quality EFS lenses for a crop body. It makes a lot of difference.
Click to expand...

Im looking for a new lens on my current crop body and will probably upgrade to full frame in the future


hmm the 17-55 is sounding abit more tempting.

How is the Tamron 17-50? looks like a cheaper option worth considering.
 
Last edited:
daralough said:
Forget the 24-105mm on a crop body if you like fitting things in. Its very restrictive as a walkabout on a crop body IMO. Id get a 17-55mm IS F2.8, Its got everything people dream about in a lens except for L series build quality. It is the best walkabout for a crop imo
Click to expand...

You try living with a 24mm prime ;)

I used to own the 24-105 on a crop and did find it a little restrictive, but then I sold it for a 35L, then I realised I really did need something wider and got a 24L.
24mm on a crop isn't that wide and ideally you want something wider. If you're planning on moving to FF in the near future, then something like the 24-105 would do you for now.
 
I have 24-105 and love it. Really works well for me as a walkabout lens, but it depends on you're surrounds and what you want to snap. Possibly a bit long but I like the flexability it has.

I had a kit 17-55 and man it was awful. However a 17-55mm IS F2.8 sounds interesting, don't really know much about it to be honest, seems a little unusual to have IS on such a short lens, suppose it's better to have the option though.
 
The 55 end is almost a 90mm equivilent on the crop body, so definitely long enough to feel the benefits of the IS in low light.

The cheap walkaround on the crop bodies is the 17-85mm f/4-5.6, which actually corresponds nicely with the 24-105mm on a FF (effectively 27-136mm). Obviously the build quality and optics aren't up to the same standard, but its great for the money.
 
what about the 15-85 - its the better version of the 17-85 (and twice the price of course)
 
aeronic said:
what about the 15-85 - its the better version of the 17-85 (and twice the price of course)
Click to expand...

Its great, apart from costing twice the price that is! I actually think that the 17-85 is a superb match for any x00D/x000D series camera, the 15-85 for the x0D series and the 17-55 lives for the 7D! They're just my own match-ups but I think they correspond rather well!
 
I have canon 17-55 and it's a great lens but I have to say that I have just rented the 24-105 to take on holiday and it's great never came off my 7d
 
17-55 2.8 and 15-85 are the two best walkabout lenses for Canon croppers. Both v sharp. 17-85 is not one of Canon's greatest.

Worry about full frame when you get there. Quality EF-S lenses like those two hold their value well. Buy a good used one and you'll not lose a penny.

Cheaper Tamron 17-50 2.8 gets good rep (non-VC version).
 
HoppyUK said:
17-55 2.8 and 15-85 are the two best walkabout lenses for Canon croppers. Both v sharp. 17-85 is not one of Canon's greatest.

Worry about full frame when you get there. Quality EF-S lenses like those two hold their value well. Buy a good used one and you'll not lose a penny.

Cheaper Tamron 17-50 2.8 gets good rep (non-VC version).
Click to expand...
What the learned man before me said........
 
Owned the 17-85 and took alot off good pictures with it too(i thought), then i replaced it with the 17-55,wow, the 17-55 is amazing. Should have been an L for its optics, but the bulid is not in L flavour. 2.8 IS ring USM, do i need to add on that:cool:, 15-85 is supposed too be good aswell, but its not 2.8, and its poor at 15-17. I didnt miss the last 30 after UPGRADING from 17-85 to a 17-55:):D
 
The 17-55mm f2.8 has a great reputation, but it's EFS and very expensive. Build quality is a bit disappointing at this price point. The Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 also gets excellent feedback and is a lot cheaper. Canon's 15-85mm is definitely worth a look but is quite pricey too, and may be a bit too slow, depending what you want to do.

Seriously, try the 17-85mm. I got mine as part of a kit with the 30D and meant to sell it on straight away, but I decided to keep it and have no regrets. I would never have paid full retail for this lens, but it's got a very useful range as a walkabout, mine is sharp, and you can get used copies pretty cheaply now. Downsides? Serious distortion at the wide end (correctable), a bit slow and build quality isn't great. It's OK though, for the price.
 
I've had the Tamron 17-50 (non VC) for a couple of years now & used it on a 450d and 50d. I think it's an excellent lens.
 
I often found myself using 50mm as a walkabout lens. It gets the job done pretty well and as Im shoting a lot inside different cathedrals and churches low light ability helps a lot.
It really depends on what you're shoting, do you really find your 18-55 limiting you?if so and you need extra focal range, 24-105mm will be spot on.
 
I don't really know where the comments about poor build quality come from with the canon 17-55. It goes with me everywhere, it's got wet, it's been dropped onto damp sand (on the body) and it performs better than almost any other lens I have ever run on my 7D. OK the 70-200 is built like a tank, similar to the other large telephoto's, but IMHO it's probably the best EF-S lensCanon have ever made. More importantly it's worth the money !

There was a thread on here about issues with the Tamron, but never having used one I can't comment personally.

Steve
 
Im thinking of going for a lower budget lens as its nice to have money left over and im nowhere near rich so i might have to pass on the 17-55. What issues does the tamron have?
 
Re the 15-85 being slow... The IS system is pretty darned good and gives ~4 stops (that's not just a manufacturer claim, but also repeated in reviews of the lens). The only reason for 17-55 is needing better DoF separation or shooting moving objects in low light...
 
dayleh said:
Im thinking of going for a lower budget lens as its nice to have money left over and im nowhere near rich so i might have to pass on the 17-55. What issues does the tamron have?
Click to expand...

I can't link directly to the thread as I'm on my iPad, but the thread title was TAMRON 17-50 VC / NON VC in "Talk Equipment". Like I said, I've never used a Tamron lens at all, so can't really comment either way.

Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top