IS or USM which one make lens much heavier?

[blacksmith]

new comer for slr...

[varf]

very frankly.. why would it matter?

variation in aperture size usually results in the largest difference in lens weight for the same manufacturer.

[adamadam]

neither

[blacksmith]

tried the 400D kit II and feel that the combination does not balance.. the lens is kind of heavier than the body... compared to kit 1 lens, IS and USM are the main features except the longer zoom.. so I am not sure the extra weight come from the two features or the internal design of the lens

[unseenshadows]

Maybe because there are more glass elements in the 17-85 as compared to the 18-55?

BTW the 17-85 is one of the lightest walkaround lens options.

[coffee3in1]

Originally Posted by unseenshadows Maybe because there are more glass elements in the 17-85 as compared to the 18-55? BTW the 17-85 is one of the lightest walkaround lens options.

W00t! Yup, i have it and absolutely love it. Brought it to Korean and used it for 95% of the time. Of coz 18-200 would be nice too, but I prefer wide to long.

[blacksmith]

Originally Posted by unseenshadows Maybe because there are more glass elements in the 17-85 as compared to the 18-55? BTW the 17-85 is one of the lightest walkaround lens options.

This mean a light body like 400D does not mean too much when it is attached with a reasonable good zoom lens ...

[Gunbucker]

While there is a slight weight difference between IS and non-IS lenses, it's usually negligible.

It's usually the max aperture size that directly impacts the weight.

[ditikolon]

Get the battery grip (vertical handgrip) for the 400D and tadaa you've got that balance.

[blacksmith]

Originally Posted by ditikolon Get the battery grip (vertical handgrip) for the 400D and tadaa you've got that balance.

the same word from the saleman at Best Denki as well... that mean I just need to carry extra weight when battery is not a problem for me.

[calebk]

Neither of the above factors.

The factors that usually mean an increase in weight are

1. Longer focal length/wider range of focal lengths (ie 18-55 vs 17-85: the 17-85 has a wider zoom range)
2. Larger/constant aperture opening (f/2.8 lenses vs f/4-5.6 lenses)
3. A combination of these two factors

[FilterFunk]

1 more not so obvious factor is the built type..
notice Tokina(s) are much heavier than Tamron(s) even though they have similar focal lengths for their lens? (16-50 vs 17-50)

[xunjas]

IS or USM doesn't affect much, it is the aperture, bigger aperture relates to heavier lenses as well as those super telephoto lenses would have heavier weight..

[Tumbleweed]

Originally Posted by blacksmith tried the 400D kit II and feel that the combination does not balance.. the lens is kind of heavier than the body... compared to kit 1 lens, IS and USM are the main features except the longer zoom.. so I am not sure the extra weight come from the two features or the internal design of the lens

Welcome to the world of budget SLRs. The body is cheaper and lighter because it is made with more plastics. It may feel okay with an 18-55mm lens but once you start investing in better quality optics (i.e. bigger and heavier due to more metal and glass used) you will find your camera to be front heavy.

The minimum DSLR which balances well for most optics would be 20D/30D/40D. If your budget cannot stretch to buy them then you have to live with some compromises. That's life.

[xunjas]

Originally Posted by Tumbleweed Welcome to the world of budget SLRs. The body is cheaper and lighter because it is made with more plastics. It may feel okay with an 18-55mm lens but once you start investing in better quality optics (i.e. bigger and heavier due to more metal and glass used) you will find your camera to be front heavy. The minimum DSLR which balances well for most optics would be 20D/30D/40D. If your budget cannot stretch to buy them then you have to live with some compromises. That's life.

Not that bad la.. 800 can buy 20D which is the same price for a 2nd hand 400D. =)

[blacksmith]

Originally Posted by Tumbleweed Welcome to the world of budget SLRs. The body is cheaper and lighter because it is made with more plastics. It may feel okay with an 18-55mm lens but once you start investing in better quality optics (i.e. bigger and heavier due to more metal and glass used) you will find your camera to be front heavy. The minimum DSLR which balances well for most optics would be 20D/30D/40D. If your budget cannot stretch to buy them then you have to live with some compromises. That's life.

I would stay with the kit lens then...

[blurry80]

i think its the large aperture size, because if aperture bigger the glass is bigger.

If there are 13 pieces of glass in the lens. you need to upsize all the glasses which makes it heavy.

[unseenshadows]

At the end of the day, its not the size and weight or the min aperture or the focal length of your equipment that matters.

Its what you shoot.

[blacksmith]

Originally Posted by unseenshadows At the end of the day, its not the size and weight or the min aperture or the focal length of your equipment that matters. Its what you shoot.

Most of my pictures would be for my kid.. indoor... and then travel and street... so not targeting on those top lens... I prefer more on those light and cheap lens

[xunjas]

Originally Posted by blacksmith Most of my pictures would be for my kid.. indoor... and then travel and street... so not targeting on those top lens... I prefer more on those light and cheap lens

24-85mm is worth the buy. Good range and price and gd image quality.