Lens Suggestion for Canon

Discussion in 'Canon' started by Kyle Boatright, Mar 28, 2005.

  1. I'm looking for a good walk around lens for a 350XT. The kit lens is a
    borderline throw away, and the Canon 17-85 is expensive for such a slow
    lens. Also, I'd prefer not to buy digital only lenses, because I hope that
    Canon will eventually come out with prosumer level sensors that are full
    35mm size...

    Suggestions? My 2nd lens will be the L series F 4.0 70-200 zoom.

    Thanks in advance...

    KB
     
    Kyle Boatright, Mar 28, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Kyle Boatright

    Tim S. Guest

    I just bought a 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 USM IS lens and love it.....IS is nice
    for a walk around lens..Shooting with a 20D

    Tim
     
    Tim S., Mar 28, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Everything is a compromise, but I want something that goes to ~28mm
    equivalent on the wide side. I'd also like something that is faster than
    f/5.6 on the long end... Of course, the lens I want would have excellent
    optical quality, fast and silent focusing, and would come as a throw in with
    a box of Cracker-Jack ;-).

    KB
     
    Kyle Boatright, Mar 28, 2005
    #3
  4. I expect everyone will suggest zooms, all of which will be either
    pricey or somehow less than ideal optically or in build quality;
    so to be contrary, I will suggest the Canon 28mm f/1.8.

    I'm not just being perverse, though: that's the walking-around lens
    I bought to replace the 18-55mm kit lens, and I've been very happy
    with it. I almost never use anything else.
     
    Ben Rosengart, Mar 28, 2005
    #4
  5. Kyle Boatright

    G.T. Guest

    I like the EF 35mm f/2 as a walk around lens.

    Greg
     
    G.T., Mar 28, 2005
    #5
  6. Kyle Boatright

    paul Guest


    The fast 35mm suggested below should provide the best autofocus
    (focusing happens at wide aperture before the shot is taken) and be a
    normal crop frame lens serving the walkaround purpose with excellent
    quality.
     
    paul, Mar 28, 2005
    #6
  7. Kyle Boatright

    PRAR Guest

    I find the 1.6 factor makes the 28 end of this lens (45mm equivalent)
    not wide enough for general purpose use.

    PRAR
    --
    <http://www.i.am/prar/> and <http://prar.fotopic.net/>
    As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it. --Dick Cavett
    Please reply to the newsgroup. That is why it exists.
    NB Anti-spam measures in force
    - If you must email me use the Reply to address and not
     
    PRAR, Mar 28, 2005
    #7
  8. I bought a Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5. The AF is noisy and the lens hunts
    a bit in low light but I think its a good compromise given its nice
    contrast and colour. The Canon 28-135mm must be nice but I was looking
    at replacing the kit lens which is 18mm wide so I didn't want a 28mm
    and 24mm looked like a decent compromise. At the other end, the 135mm
    reach is nice.

    I think Canon and other EOS lens manufacturers owe the consumers a
    18-75+ with a constant f/2.8 aperture.

    - Siddhartha
     
    Siddhartha Jain, Mar 29, 2005
    #8
  9. Kyle Boatright

    Robert Guest

    I have been trawling the lens review sites - particularly
    fredmiranda.com and photozone.de and the dpreview lens fora and as the
    result have a Tamron 28-75 on order. The consensus of opinion on this
    lens seems to be that it is optically in the same league as the Canon
    24-70 but about a third of the price. Obviously there is a trade off in
    build quality - the Canon is built like a tank, but the Tamron has a
    considerable weight advantage of 510 grams against 950 grams if you are
    concerned about such things.
     
    Robert, Mar 29, 2005
    #9
  10. Did you research/compare the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 with the Tamron
    28-75mm? Or the Sigma 28-70mm?

    I want a buy a a 24/28-70/75mm f/2.8 for my Maxxum 5.

    Thanks,

    Siddhartha
     
    Siddhartha Jain, Mar 29, 2005
    #10
  11. Kyle Boatright

    Robert Guest

    The Sigma 24-70 f2.8 and 28-70 f2.8 user reports that I have read are
    good but not quite as good as the Tamron.
     
    Robert, Mar 29, 2005
    #11
  12. Kyle Boatright

    Steve Dell Guest

    I've been very satisfied with the Canon 28-135 IS lens.

    Steve
     
    Steve Dell, Mar 29, 2005
    #12
  13. Kyle Boatright

    Lourens Smak Guest

    And I think that Canons reasoning is that people who want that reach but
    at f/2.8, should buy a 1D series. Then there's the 24-70L which is a
    fine lens. The amateur bodies get matching lenses, which means slow and
    with less good build-quality. There will be EF-S-L lenses only when the
    1D mk4 or so uses a 1.6x crop sensor. (which will probably not happen)

    So, Sigma is your best bet. They have an 18-50 f/2.8 but I don't think
    it is shipping yet. It sucks huh, first choosing Canon for their huge
    lens-range, and then having to buy a Sigma to get what you want...

    Lourens
     
    Lourens Smak, Mar 31, 2005
    #13
  14. I posted about it a few days ago, and Alan Browne pointed out that
    its photozone.de ratings are less than inspiring.
     
    Ben Rosengart, Apr 1, 2005
    #14
  15. Kyle Boatright

    Alan Browne Guest

    You posted the data, I just interpreted the data to be poor for my
    purposes. You noted the slow AF as being bad for you, I noted wide open
    performance as being bad for me.

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, Apr 1, 2005
    #15
  16. All true. You also noted that with cognitive dissonance driving up
    lens ratings, the mediocre rating of this lens ought to be interpreted
    through, um, what are the opposite of rose-colored glasses? Aquamarine
    glasses? Anyway, I thought it was a good point, and it helped me
    scratch this lens off my list.
     
    Ben Rosengart, Apr 1, 2005
    #16
  17. Kyle Boatright

    Alan Browne Guest

    Ben Rosengart wrote:

    Too bad. I mean for all of us. It would be great if there were two 3rd
    party lens makers that could consistently make great lenses across the
    line and keep the OEM's in price check.

    As to the ratings at photozone there is another section which summarizes
    the ratings by various (unnamed to protect the guilty) magazines. A
    narrower composite of presumably more reliable raters.

    Back to the user ratings ... one could assume a lighter weighting to
    raters of lower value lenses with a very low number of imputs and give
    it more weight as the number of inputs rose above, say, 30 inputs.

    On higher performance glass (like the const. aperture fast zoom in
    question), one could asssume that the raters are more knowledgeable and
    give their ratings more weight even at a lower number of inputs.

    So the lens in question shouldn't be derated any further as it is aimed
    at a more knowledgeable photographer. That's actually what I think has
    happened with this particular rating on p-zone.

    It used to be that we could go to photodo for a cross check on sharpness
    and distotion but they seem to have stopped doing new ratings about 2
    years ago.

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, Apr 1, 2005
    #17
  18. How do I find that? I'd ask for a link, but my experience with deep
    links into photozone.de is that they don't always work. Thanks in
    advance.
     
    Ben Rosengart, Apr 1, 2005
    #18
  19. Kyle Boatright

    Alan Browne Guest

    Yes, it's a pain.

    Start at the home page.

    Look on the extreme right, halfway down for "updated Lens Test Guide"

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, Apr 1, 2005
    #19
  20. Thanks. BTW, in this case, deep linking does appear to work. The
    URL is <http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm> .
     
    Ben Rosengart, Apr 1, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.