Replacement lens

Rob Wright

Rob Wright

Messages
346
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
I am looking to replace my Canon EFS 17-85 kit lens with a better walk about lens.
Can anyone please let me have your suggestions as to what I should be looking at - budget no more than £1k.
Thank you.
 
Depends what you shoot as suggested the 24-105L is a good choice, although not an L I've been pleased with the results from new 15-85 on my 7D, which does give you a wider option on a crop camera. However if you have a WA already then 24-105L would be the way to go.
 
useful thread as I'm considering the same thing myself, my main concern is weight and size, I held off buying a DSLR after getting rid of my SLR film kit 5 years ago and have been using a succession of non-SLRs. I just bought a 500D and am blown away by the difference so now it's time to expand my kit
 
If you only want to have just one lens it's gotta be the 24-105 L. Can be found for around £750 ish. But it depends on whether you'll miss the 17-24 range after being used to the 17-85. In which case you'll maybe look at a 17-50 as well to add to your armoury !
 
This 24-105 L gets talked about a lot. Why? I'd feel hampered by such a slow lens.
 
The23rdman said:
This 24-105 L gets talked about a lot. Why? I'd feel hampered by such a slow lens.
Click to expand...

People seem to be obsessed with owning f2.8 lens and I`m not sure why, I can see the benefeits for weddings etc but for normal use... :shrug: It`s only one stop and IS can give you 3 stops or more.

Can I ask what you shoot that F4 is of no use?
 
that's a good point that chilliz makes, on a similar theme I have 8x42 bins for birding, but got 8x32s for my OH so they would be a bit lighter. Well, guess what, the low-light performance that people go on about is not worth the extra weight and bulk I have to lug around so I'm going to get some 8x32s for myself. Maybe it's the same thing with that extra lens thing too.
 
sitemaster said:
that's a good point that chilliz makes, on a similar theme I have 8x42 bins for birding, but got 8x32s for my OH so they would be a bit lighter. Well, guess what, the low-light performance that people go on about is not worth the extra weight and bulk I have to lug around so I'm going to get some 8x32s for myself. Maybe it's the same thing with that extra lens thing too.
Click to expand...

The exit pupil (diameter of the objective lenses divided by the magnification) is the main determinant of low light capability in binoculars, but the optical quality and lens coatings play a role too. I have 8 x 40s for wildlife/birds, but I also have a pair of far more expensive Leica 8 x 25s. They're certainly not my first choice for poor light, but punch way above their weight in these conditions. To be fair though, I bought them for backpacking in South Africa where the light tends to be far more intense than the UK, and twilight is short.
 
It depends what your average walkabout involves when it comes to picture taking. Do you need wide angle and telephoto?

I had the 24-105 on my 40D and it stayed on there 90% of the time. Only when i needed telephoto or macro would i change the lens. I disagree completely that f4 is too slow, i never found that the lens hindered me at all.

That said, i was happy shooting landscape at 24mm on a crop sensor, i like distant objects to be that bit closer rather than the other end of a small field looking like it's 10 miles away with no detail.

There's plenty of options available, all depends where you want to set your limitations of what you want one lens to do.
 
"It`s only one stop and IS can give you 3 stops or more."

Yes, but IS is probably going to be useless if the subject moves.
 
MartynK said:
The exit pupil (diameter of the objective lenses divided by the magnification) is the main determinant of low light capability in binoculars, but the optical quality and lens coatings play a role too. I have 8 x 40s for wildlife/birds, but I also have a pair of far more expensive Leica 8 x 25s. They're certainly not my first choice for poor light, but punch way above their weight in these conditions. To be fair though, I bought them for backpacking in South Africa where the light tends to be far more intense than the UK, and twilight is short.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to hijack the thread, but thanks for this.
 
For walkabout F/4 + IS is really plenty too much. Most landscape work will be done at f/8 or more so IS helps, if used without the tripod. Now at that point 24-70mm owners including me grab their tripod (preferred) or increase ISO, or open the diafragm thus degrading the image.
For people and events everything is reversed, although I'd take f/2.8 AND IS everyday. Now hurry up Canon!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top