Seeking wisdom from the Canon lens gurus


Status
Not open for further replies.

LordMonkey

New Member
Aug 28, 2008
14
0
0
#1
Apologies if this have been posted before.

I'm a currently treading the shallow waters of photography and have enjoyed numerous quality time with my Canon 400D.

I want to upgrade my current walk-about lens, EF-S 18-55 IS, and currently standing on a crossroad between two models.

So experienced shooters, should which path should I take?


Canon EF 28-135 mm 3.5-5.6 IS USM

or

Canon EF-S 17-85mm/4.5-5.6 IS USM

Many thanks in advance.
 

Jul 27, 2008
472
0
0
Singapore
www.flickr.com
#2
Canon EF 28-135 mm 3.5-5.6 IS USM gets my vote.... do note that the 18-55 has been duplicated in terms of focal distance with Canon EF-S 17-85mm/4.5-5.6 IS USM. It would therefore make sense to branch out to the long end.

Furthermore the 17mm on the 17-85 was said to be very distorted. therefore not point looking to get the 1mm wider distorted end.

Just my thoughts.
 

LordMonkey

New Member
Aug 28, 2008
14
0
0
#3
Thanks for replying, Snapperholic. Your input has helped me.

My other question is that will I be losing anything because the 11mm difference between the two lenses. One starts at 17mm while the other is at 28mm. :)
 

J-Chan

Senior Member
Sep 21, 2005
2,361
1
0
#4
with the 28-135 you'll be losing alot on the wide end.. just try it on your kit lens when you shoot next time, restrict yourself to only 28mm and above..
 

loonz

New Member
Jan 18, 2007
36
0
0
#5
I am also using 400D. I would choose a lens with as low as 18mm for a walk around lens. I find even 24mm is too narrow for my usage. Therefore, I chose Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-F4.5 for my walk around lens.

I think maybe what you can do is look at your pictures. At what focus length do you usually take your pictures. If you usually take your pictures at above 28mm, then you would not lose much.
 

zzyzx

New Member
Aug 25, 2007
784
0
0
#7
Apologies if this have been posted before.

I'm a currently treading the shallow waters of photography and have enjoyed numerous quality time with my Canon 400D.

I want to upgrade my current walk-about lens, EF-S 18-55 IS, and currently standing on a crossroad between two models.

So experienced shooters, should which path should I take?


Canon EF 28-135 mm 3.5-5.6 IS USM

or

Canon EF-S 17-85mm/4.5-5.6 IS USM

Many thanks in advance.

Under what circumstance do you feel you need a change? image quality? focal range? if it's image quality, then i suggest you give the 17-85 a miss as your 18-55 can do better. if you're not satisfied with your 18-55, then spend on a better lens like the 17-55. if it's focal length, then i suggest you get your second lens.
 

calebk

Senior Member
Jul 25, 2006
10,594
0
0
Clementi
#8
Canon EF 28-135 mm 3.5-5.6 IS USM gets my vote.... do note that the 18-55 has been duplicated in terms of focal distance with Canon EF-S 17-85mm/4.5-5.6 IS USM. It would therefore make sense to branch out to the long end.

Furthermore the 17mm on the 17-85 was said to be very distorted. therefore not point looking to get the 1mm wider distorted end.

Just my thoughts.
Er, if the TS is looking to replace his current walkabout lens, why "branch out"? You should be looking at something of similar focal length.

In any case, TS, I would actually suggest skipping both of these and stretch your dollar to get the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. A solid lens that has come down in price recently. It may be almost the same range as your kit lens, but its quality is miles from the kit lens.
 

Aug 8, 2008
605
0
0
Singapore
#9
Apologies if this have been posted before.

I'm a currently treading the shallow waters of photography and have enjoyed numerous quality time with my Canon 400D.

I want to upgrade my current walk-about lens, EF-S 18-55 IS, and currently standing on a crossroad between two models.

So experienced shooters, should which path should I take?


Canon EF 28-135 mm 3.5-5.6 IS USM

or

Canon EF-S 17-85mm/4.5-5.6 IS USM

Many thanks in advance.
Hi. I had a 400D as well and I bought the 28-135, as my main walkaround lens (I couldn't afford an "L" yet). I am pleased with the quality it produces and the IS does a good job.

Admittedly the 28mm end is not wide enough for the 1.6 factor of 400D. But I don't shoot so much wide angle with this as I've got another EFS 10-22mm lens that does this job better. I do find the 135mm end very useful though I have to make do with the small f5.6 at this end.

The only thing I don't quite like about this lens is the weight. Yes, it is solidly built but on a 400D body, it's kinda like imbalanced. I then got a battery grip and it was much better to hold and shoot. Now that I have a 40D (slightly larger body), this lens feels quite alright.
 

AndyC

New Member
Feb 5, 2007
282
0
0
inside Bedok Res
#10
Apologies if this have been posted before.

I'm a currently treading the shallow waters of photography and have enjoyed numerous quality time with my Canon 400D.

I want to upgrade my current walk-about lens, EF-S 18-55 IS, and currently standing on a crossroad between two models.

So experienced shooters, should which path should I take?


Canon EF 28-135 mm 3.5-5.6 IS USM

or

Canon EF-S 17-85mm/4.5-5.6 IS USM

Many thanks in advance.
if $ is not an issue, get wat i got...10-105 well covered with up to 300 possible in bright day light.

hahaha...just joking...i would suggest 28-135 unless u like working in tight spaces where u dun have much space to move back (remember the ad from P brand abt their cam? the one where the shooted cracked the wall trying to move back to have everyone in the shot?) or landscape shots...i usually prefer the reach than the wide...if i wan wide i rather go for ultra wide (not recommended for people shots though...they all appear like alien with long heads...) :bsmilie:
 

LordMonkey

New Member
Aug 28, 2008
14
0
0
#11
Hi

Once again thank you for all your advice and input.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very contented with my current lens.

The reason behind my search for a new walk-about lens is because I'm always have to swap my lenses each I feel my 18-55 couldn't reach the target and after swaping to my 55-250mm IS for that one or two shot, i have to swap the lenses again.

I guess, I'm also looking for dexterity something that could minimize the chore of having to swap my lenses just because of the shortcomings of my 18-55mm.

I could push my budget up to 1.2K.

Should I consider 3rd party lenses as well?
 

Octarine

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 3, 2008
12,517
31
48
Pasir Ris
#12
I guess, I'm also looking for dexterity something that could minimize the chore of having to swap my lenses just because of the shortcomings of my 18-55mm.
If lens changing is a chore to you can get a 18-200 or a prosumer camera. The concept of SLR includes changing of lenses.
It might be tempting to have "one lens that fits all purposes" but there is none. The convenience of having one lens for a broad focal range comes with the shortfalls of such a lens: distortions, lower sharpness and smaller maximum aperture. Balance well between these facts, your budget and chose wise. Also, have a look at 3d party lenses as well. No reason to neglect this wide range of lenses.
 

LordMonkey

New Member
Aug 28, 2008
14
0
0
#13
If lens changing is a chore to you can get a 18-200 or a prosumer camera. The concept of SLR includes changing of lenses.
It might be tempting to have "one lens that fits all purposes" but there is none. The convenience of having one lens for a broad focal range comes with the shortfalls of such a lens: distortions, lower sharpness and smaller maximum aperture. Balance well between these facts, your budget and chose wise. Also, have a look at 3d party lenses as well. No reason to neglect this wide range of lenses.
Don't get me wrong. I don't mind swaping between the two lens and I have no intererst in getting that one lens that fits all purposes.

That's why I've narrowed my search down to the two lenses in question because both of them have that little extra reach which my current walk-about lens couldn't serve.

I've also locked my sights onto this.

SIGMA 18-125mm F/3.8-5.6 DC OS HSM

Thanks for the input, Octarine
 

sORe-EyEz

Senior Member
Jun 28, 2005
1,572
0
0
SGee
#14
to TS,

with a max budget of $1200, consider Sigma's or Tamron's lenses.

read reviews from here to decide.
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php

eith lenses covering 18-200mm in some do-it-all lenses, dust getting onto the sensers is the last of your worries. i did not go that route as i have a Canon 28-135mm IS from film days, i went for Tokina's 12-24mm to cover my WA needs.

:)
 

Last edited:

chalib

Senior Member
Oct 4, 2007
2,072
0
0
#15
Wait for canon 18-200 IS :devil:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom