Walkabout lens ideas

[jayxx83]

I have had my canon 350d for a while now and have been hankering after a new lens for sometime now. Im not a pro so no concered with really high end lenses but just wanted something suitable for everyday use that lets you get a little creative.

I initially was looking at a 17-85mm canon ef-s jobbie but after seeing the sigma 18-125mm which has a f stop of 3.5 compared to the canons 4.0 looks to be a better bet. The additional zoom wont go amiss either.

has anyone had experience with either of these two?

Cheers in advance

 

[Revels]

50mm f1.8

You'll just have to walk about even more

 

[jayxx83]

What as in wayyy closer to the subject!?

 

[Feirny]

I'll be getting a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 when I get a job, it's quite big but does a good job.

 

[Andy.]

There are some new Canon walkabouts coming. I went for the 24-105 and would not be without it. I use the long end more than the wide.

New Canon glass (should not be silly money):

EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

Both are IS which is pretty useful on a walkabout.

There is also the 18-200 IS but that seems to get a fair amount of criticism for its quality. Depends on whether you only want to use the prints for web/ or small photos or whether you are going to pixel peep and want super sharp images.

 

[Revels]

What as in wayyy closer to the subject!?

Or further away. Makes you be creative though and f1.8 is niiiiiiice!

I want the Sigma 50-150 f2.8 next.

 

[Ian]

As mentioned above, either the 24-70mm f/2.8 (Canon L/Sigma) or 24-105mm f/4 L would get my vote, or possibly either of the two new lenses. The 50mm would be good for portability/being inconspicuous though and a lot cheaper.

My ideal lens setup would probably be 16-35mm (landscape, indoors, wideangle), 24-70mm/105mm (walkabout, portrait), 70-200mm (portrait, motorsport etc), 100-400mm (motorsport, wildlife etc.), take a while to save up though!

 

[Jungle_Jim]

whats your budget mate, i picked up a Canon 28-135mm IS USM for about £200 new off ebay, apart from the zoom creep its not a bad lens, previously i had a sigma 28-135 with macro and that was good to although it broke

some examples of the siggy

 

[unofficialPete]

18-55 IS is probably the best value walk around, wouldn't bother with the 17-85 IMO, then there is the new EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, worth considering pending reviews and price.

 

[BenWall]

17-50 tamron 2.8 is good.

I'm also selling my 50-150 revels

 

[Billy]

17-50 tamron 2.8 is good.

I'm also selling my 50-150 revels

Why you selling the 50-150 Ben!
It's a fantastic lens.

Is yours the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 APO DC HSM or the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 EX DC II HSM?

 

[Teshi]

From a person who has gone through many lenses, Ben has hit the nail on the head, Tamron 17-20 2.8 BUT the main issue here is all this talk about 3.5 vs 4.0 is all about how much light enters the lens. Are you planning to use it for low light work? If not, your current lens is fine.

If you want shallower depth of field, grab the 50mm 1.8.

 

[BenWall]

Why you selling the 50-150 Ben!
It's a fantastic lens.

Is yours the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 APO DC HSM or the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 EX DC II HSM?

The later. I'm selling as I need a new car, and I don't use the lens enough. Its amazing and wish I could keep it.

The tamron 17-50 is superb, hasn't left my camera since getting one.

Example, shot @ 2.8 1600 iso.

 

[vibrio]

if you are wanting a standard zoom then somthing starting around 17mm is best. The new canon lenses are stupidly expensive, the 15-85 has an SRP of £800 so even knocking a couple of hundred off for a street price it ain't cheap.

there are plenty of choices and it comes down to how much you want to spend

sigma 18-50 f2.8 macro
tamron 17-50 f2.8 VC (tamrons IS system)
Canon 17-55 f2.8
canon 17-85 f4-5.6

then there are the super zooms 18-125, 18-200 etc etc personally I would stay away from these

an outside bet would be a 24-xx type lens but on an APS-C sensor it is not particularly wide although in saying that I used to have a canon 40D with the 24-105 f4 L lol

 

[Andy.]

£800!!!! The 24-105L and 17-55 F2.8 are only pennies more?!? What are canon thinking?

 

[vibrio]

£800!!!! The 24-105L and 17-55 F2.8 are only pennies more?!? What are canon thinking?

srp of the 24-105 is £1330 and the 17-55 is £1140

 

[Andy.]

But they do sell for considerably less. If shops hold to the RRP I doubt many will sell.

Off topic, are you still enjoying the 5D?

 

[Revels]

I'm also selling my 50-150 revels

Noooo. Don't tempt me.

I want a D90 first..

 

[Feirny]

Lens first

 

[Ian]

^Agreed, I think..

But they do sell for considerably less. If shops hold to the RRP I doubt many will sell.

Off topic, are you still enjoying the 5D?

Yeah, you can pick up a new 24-105mm for around £750 and the 17-55mm for around £700; even Jessops have the 24-105mm at under £1000, so the new lenses would have to be much closer to £4-500 for me to consider getting one instead.

 

[BenWall]

Noooo. Don't tempt me.

I want a D90 first..

Do you a deal on both

 

[Revels]

lol, lemme go check and see how my money tree is getting on.

 

[Paul_G]

I've got a Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 serving as my walk-around.

It's a pretty decent lens and really sharp once a you stop down a bit....an example...

 

[Tigger]

Just got that lens too Paul - it's great

 

[derv]

I just got that lens too for my 400D, £120 off ebay. haven't had much chance to try it out yet though!

 

[browno]

I've just got myself the sigma 50-150 2.8, and it's superb - a really sharp, fast lens but not too big or heavy to have on the camera all day (unlike the 70-200, which is a heavy beast of a thing, but lovely if you need the reach!) - I've not done loads with it yet, but I'm really liking it so far!

Go on Revels, get it bought, you know you want to!

 

[JJ!]

Canon 17-85 is another good walkabout lens - covers the ideal range. Reviews are mixed, but I think its down to people expecting £1000 quality from a £300 lens!

The 18-135is sounds great, but its £400 at the moment which to me is way to high for a lens that does not have USM. The new 15-85 is like £700!

 

[2thumbs]

18-55mm IS is an excellent budget lens.

Could look in to a 17-40L if you have that sort of budget. As has been said, the Tamron 17-50mm is a great lens too.

 

[Tigger]

I'm now running the 17-70mm Sigma on the D40 with a UV & skylight filter I love it

 

[JJ!]

I have changed my mind on the 17-85is after getting one today. I dont like it. Back to just the 50mm it is whilst I choose!

 

[Perrinho]

The 17 - 85 IS is a fantastic lens, for around 200 quid, you will not get better. The sigma equivalents are good, but they dont focus anywhere near as fast as the IS....What is your budget btw?

 

[JJ!]

Maybe I will give the 17-85 more time, my budget is around £350, but ideally I need over 55mm.

I was considering getting a 85mm F1.8 or 100mm F2.0 as I do a lot of sports and cant afford a constant speed zoom and the 2 mentioned have very good reviews!