walk around lens on a canon

I'm looking to up grade my kit lens on 400D, but as I'm hoping to get a 40D or 50D soon, I've been looking at a few lenses to buy with it. So I'm looking for some feed back on these, but I'm also open to any suggestion.

Cheers,

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM
Canon EF-S 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 IS
Canon EF 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon EF 28-200mm f3.5-5.6 USM
Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 DC OS

I have the Canon 28-135 which is a handy size with IS and at a reasonable price. Possibly not the sharpest option in that size range but adequate for general use and the better alternatives will cost more.

The lens which I use most for general work is the Canon 70-300 IS which couples well with the 28-135 and is a good general lens at a sensible price. Once again there may be better alternatives but at a substantially increased price.

But a lot will depend on what you want to photograph. I consider 28 mm to be a small lens and work mostly around the 100 to 300 range; but a lot of people consider 100 mm to be excessively large.

Macro and wildlife photography mean that I also use lenses which most people would never consider.

It depends on the price you are able/willing to invest as well as the quality which you demand from your imagery.

IMO, the best combination (and the one I use on two cameras - 30D and 40D) is the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses.

The above combo is expensive. A less espensive but very good option would be the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 along with the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS lenses.

I've got about £450 ish to spend, and I've got a 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS. I was trying to keep the wide end as I use it.

As you already have the 70-300 I would consider something in the 18-150 mm range to complement your current lens rather than going for a wide range lens. That is unless you have a specific need to zoom 28-200 mm.

Ideally, if I was replacing my 28-135 mm I would go for the Canon 24-105 IS F4 L lens which gets excellent reviews http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/18...report--review

But at around £1000 so it should! Check out the other options at that review site and see what you think.

Personally, if I couldn't afford that lens, or didn't want to wait until I could, then the 28-135 IS looks the best bet at around £400, with the 17-85 just a couple of pounds more.

ps. Spending other people's money is great fun!

What Geoff has said makes a lot of sense. Although I'm in the Nikon camp I have an 18-105 to go with my 70-300, and I find the 18-105 (effectively 27-157) to be a very useful range.

cheers for the replies.i've found a shop that close.that has a Canon EF 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS in stock. so i'll going for look

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bootsy

cheers for the replies.i've found a shop that close.that has a Canon EF 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS in stock. so i'll going for look

---

You MIGHT be better off looking for a used 28-135mm lens. Canon packaged this lens with some of their cameras as a kit and sold the kit at a very small premium over the price of the camera alone. Many photogrpahers, at least here in the USA, bought the kit with the intention of selling the 28-135mm lens to offset the price of the camera.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill44

I find the 18-105 (effectively 27-157) to be a very useful range.

---

If that's the D90 Kit lens (I don't know any other 18-105mm Nikons) then it's a DX lens and the effective range should surely be 18-105? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mossy

If that's the D90 Kit lens (I don't know any other 18-105mm Nikons) then it's a DX lens and the effective range should surely be 18-105? :confused:

---

When you allow for the 1.5 crop factor it gives you the same view as a 27-157 in an FX camera. Trust me on this, it's a fact.

bill44 is right, even on DX with DX glass you still have the 1.5 multiplier to cope with, and using that lens on a FF digital body would be a sme because of the resloution setback to apporximately 6 mp pixels , but when you would use non dx glass on a FF digital body you would get the full digital resolution.

on canon a "Goldfinger" EF-24-85 USM f1:3.5-4.5 is for cropped bodies a very good lense at a small price to pay. Since this silver/champain version is better than the black on that still is available on the market new , you have to look second hand.

http://backup.cambridgeincolour.com/...2cd42c8b_b.jpg
this picture of a rhodie was shot with a canon eos 300d at 54mm F 4.5! this gives a clue of the quality available (offcourse the raw file is the best but to high in size..)

I recommend this.....:)


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...mm_f_5_6L.html

yeah , if you include a un limited credit card and king kong to carry it , it most porbably will be a great walk around lense :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bootsy

I'm looking to up grade my kit lens on 400D, but as I'm hoping to get a 40D or 50D soon, I've been looking at a few lenses to buy with it. So I'm looking for some feed back on these, but I'm also open to any suggestion.

---

I didn't notice that you already have a 70-300mm IS lens and that you now have a 400D camera.

I would keep the 400D after you upgrade. If cost is a problem, select a 40D rather than a 50D and keep the 400D!

Get a 17-50mm f/2.8 Tamron lens and shoot with two bodies and two lenses. You will then have a 17-300mm focal range covered with a LOT BETTER IQ and autofocus than you could ever have with a maxi-range zoom lens such as an 18-200mm. You will have a faster aperture (f/2.8) in your mid-range zoom lens and you will also have IS capability in your long lens where you generally need that help.

BTW: I shoot with a 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and a 70-200mm f/4L IS lens and I don't miss the focal length gap between 55mm and 70mm. I doubt that you will be constrained by a 50mm to 70mm gap.

Using an OPTECH Reporter Strap, it is easy to control two cameras without getting their straps entangled. The weight of the additional 400D (about 510 Grams) is really not much of a consideration for a relatively fit person if the two cameras/lenses are supported by a good strap such as the OPTECH Reporter. I recommend having the camera with the shorter length lens on the top and the camera with the telephoto lens on the bottom.

http://www.optechusa.com/product/detail/?PRODUCT_ID=24

After you get used to shooting with a pair of cameras which eliminates lens switching in the field, I am sure you will be hooked on this method. Additionally, having the second camera is an insurance policy against missing a photo opportunity due to one camera going down on you.

If you can afford it, the 24-105 f4L IS USM is my absolute favorite walk around zoom for Canons. I only wished that Nikon produced a zoom in this range just as good on the commercial side.:(