Want versus Need - Walkabout Lens

TomTomTom

TomTomTom

Messages
351
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
No
So, it's come to summer time so I've got a lot of free time away from uni... This means lots of photography time and lots of time to want shinier things.

My current bag is a 550D with a Tamron 10-24mm, kit 18-55mm (which is now near enough permanently on tubes for macro use), 50mm f1.8 and a 55-250mm.

Now I'm thinking about buying a replacement walkabout lens - at the moment I've been using the Tamron a lot since I've only just gotten it and I've not had anything so offensively wide before, but the rest of the time the nifty fifty is on the camera and was on almost permanently before the 18-55mm was relegated to macro duty.

The ones that have caught my eye are the Canon 24-70L and the 24-105L, possibly the 28-70L but I've not heard very much on that.

According to my EXIF, while I had the 18-55mm only I used 18mm almost all the time, a lot at 55mm and then just a few in between. With the 10-24mm I use 10mm all of the time, I think I'm yet to use it at any other length. I seem to use the extremes of my zooms (bar the 10-24mm).
The 50mm gets a lot of use, and if I'm ever going to take a planned shot, say an organised portrait I'll always choose that.

I'm still relatively new to lenses and such, but I'd like to upgrade. Question is whether it's a feasible move or whether or not I'm just being fussy and want something with a tarty red ring on (I'd love a white barrel though!).

Thanks for your time:)

These are some of my typical photos:
5430640129_44ae7f3f51.jpg
3875934077_731f7bd126.jpg
5745875029_2da340a866.jpg
5560262895_6292bf910e.jpg
 
How about a 17-55mm IS F2.8, it deserves a red ring but unfortunately doesn't have one. to cure the white barrel syndrome, how about a 70-200mm F4 non-is?
 
As you already have the 55-250, I think you should concentrate on the 15-85mm range - canon do an excellent EF-s model, not to be confused with the 17-85 (whilst still better than the 18-55, not as much as the 15-85)
 
That does look very nice, but I think I'd prefer something with a little more range, hence me being interested in the 24-105! The 70-200 is such a beautiful lens (dream camera bag: 24-70L, 70-200L 2.8, 300L 2.8) but I just don't think it'd get the use it deserves from me. It's very rare that I use my 55-250, the last time was on a trip to Tropical World in Leeds, but only because I wanted closer pictures of meerkats than I could get with the 50mm!
I've only really got the 55-250 for if I get the rare chance to go to a zoo or a bike race etc, which I fear is what would become of a 70-200, whereas I'm wanting any possible new lens to be my main lens since it'll be something nice (and students don't have much money!).
 
Last edited:
Zooms aren't necessary imo. Based on your information, and the fact you don't use the tele range often, Keep the 10-20, Keep the 50mm, get rid of the 55-250 and get a prime (or two!) of at least 100mm (eg 135, 105, or 85mm - maybe a bit longer depending on what you think you want) and unless you really want to keep it for macro, get rid of the 18-55 to raise some cash too.
 
Last edited:
Looking at your setup I would look to get a standard F2.8 zoom like the Canon 17-55mm IS or the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8, or the Sigma 18-50mm IS.

I, personally, would find the 24-105 not wide enough for a walkaround lens on a crop.
 
I've only got praise for my Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, when compared to the old 18-55mm. Much sharper, f2.8 is brilliant for 'dreamy' shots and the build quality seems much better than the 18-55mm.

Bargain bucket prices too, when compared to the Canon 17-55 and 24-70L. I would have the 17-55mm if the budget allowed, but alas it didn't at the time.
 
The key is usability though Nick. Primes would be lovely but I'd feel very limited with something like an 85/105mm prime, I think I'm happy enough with the nifty (though the focus ring is miniscule).
I'm more than tempted to keep my 55-250 on for a while to see how I'd cope with the 70-200L F4, meant to be one of Canon's sharpest and most reputable? Shame that the 55-250 would bring in next to no money. I'd probably keep it just for the extra reach - one of the reasons I sold my 80-200 (rubbish lens mind) for it.

Edit:
Dave, people seem to rave about the 17-55mm , though I must admit 24mm would be wide enough for my likes! I if I needed wider I've always got my 10-24mm with me :)

Chris, the 18-55mm definitely isn't the best built or sharpest lens! I'll have a read into the Tamron 17-50!
 
Last edited:
TomTomTom said:
The key is usability though Nick. Primes would be lovely but I'd feel very limited with something like an 85/105mm prime, I think I'm happy enough with the nifty (though the focus ring is miniscule).
I'm more than tempted to keep my 55-250 on for a while to see how I'd cope with the 70-200L F4, meant to be one of Canon's sharpest and most reputable? Shame that the 55-250 would bring in next to no money. I'd probably keep it just for the extra reach - one of the reasons I sold my 80-200 (rubbish lens mind) for it.
Click to expand...

You've got 18mp to play with on the 550D, a little cropping here and there never hurt anybody, especially with so many pixels in the original. I've made some quite heavy crops with my 7D which has the same resolution, and it's been fine. Besides, the difference between 200mm and 250mm isn't enormous.

Have a play with this - http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/product/nikkor-lenses/simulator

It takes forever and a day to load, but is quite good fun when comparing the field of view between lenses.
 
Cyprino said:
You've got 18mp to play with on the 550D, a little cropping here and there never hurt anybody, especially with so many pixels in the original. I've made some quite heavy crops with my 7D which has the same resolution, and it's been fine. Besides, the difference between 200mm and 250mm isn't enormous.

Have a play with this - http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/product/nikkor-lenses/simulator

It takes forever and a day to load, but is quite good fun when comparing the field of view between lenses.
Click to expand...

That's very true! I guess with something as special as the 70-200L it'll be even less important too. The more I think about it the more I want it, but I know that it's a focal length I rarely use so I need to spend more time with the 55-250mm on. Else it's looking like the 24-70 is the one! Maybe not so the 24-105 at the moment, I feel like I could benefit from the extra light gathering abilities and looots of people seem to have and rate it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top