walk around L lens?

[walkien]

any suggestion?

[gramps]

for which camera? I use the 24 - 70 2.8 on my 20 D

[walkien]

for canon 10D

[Jon]

Any particular favourite subject matter?

[chris.bailey]

Was 28-135 in the non L days. These days I tend to use the 24-70 on a MkII and a 10D. Heavy but you can convince yourself you are weight training at the same time :lol:

[steven]

Just got back from vaction in Big Bend (Texas) and used the 24-70 as a walk about lens and was very happy with it.

Only found I was changing for very specific reasons, (macro or telephoto).

[Tom W]

Depends a bit on whether you want wider or longer - the 17-40L is a great walkaround lens on the 10D, giving the equivalent field of view of what a 27 to 63 mm lens would give you on film. If you're more inclined to prefer something with more magnification, the 24-70 will give a FOV equivalent to 38-111 on film.

Both are good IMHO, and a lot depends on what you intend to shoot.

[scottbergerphoto]

24-70 f/2.8
Landscape walks: 16-35 f/2.8
Scott

[tpinchback]

We cannot answer this question with such little information. expand.

my walkaround lens depends on where i am walking around.

if i am walking around the house it is the 50 1.8
if i am walking around the zoo it is the 70-200L 2.8

it just depends

[dsze]

Forget the Letter "L" :) The Tamron 28-75 can't be beat! Unless you have several hundred$$ EXTRA to spend for a VERY minor quality difference the 28-75 is a great walk-around. It is by far my most frequently used lens.... You'll find very few people disagree here. It seems to be a popular lens.

-daniel

[Adam Hicks]

CRAP. He beat me to the Tamron punch. Listen, seriously. Go find a great deal on the Tamron and buy it. If for some crazy unforseen reason you're not happy with it, sell it used here and take the $30 hit. I'll paypal you $10 of it. :)

Save your money for a while. There's nothing you're going to take with the 24-70 that won't look just as good from the Tamron. The L is a fantastic lens, don't get me wrong, and nothing against those who spent the big bucks...

BUT buy the Tamron and take the $$600-$700 or more that you save and put it towards a nice Macro or 85mm 1.8 or something fun :)

You'll thank me later.

[Canuck]

24-70 f/2.8
Landscape walks: 16-35 f/2.8
Scott

ditto

[Jesper]

I'm surprised that nobody has yet mentioned the 17-40 f/4L, which is the lens I use most on my 10D and which is a very popular and affordable L lens.

[nosquare2003]

I'm surprised that nobody has yet mentioned the 17-40 f/4L


A poster with nearly 3000 post is nobody?

:P

[PekkaM]

70-200 2.8 for me. I rarely like anything I take with my 17-40mm, I just cannot compose a good picture with wide angle.

[Jesper]

I'm surprised that nobody has yet mentioned the 17-40 f/4L


A poster with nearly 3000 post is nobody?

:P

Oh, I must have overlooked it.... :oops: But I would have expected many more replies recommending the 17-40, there have been many posts about this lens and many people seem to be very happy with it - it's certainly my favourite lens.

[chops]

I am in total agreement with Adam Hicks on the Tamron. Like he said, the Canon 24-70L is a great lens, but for the major price difference, the Tamron is even better!

Click on the link in Malaxos1's second post in this thread. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=48806 Also, scroll down a little and read the other posts. This lens really can't be beat for the price.

Get it! You won't regret it! :wink:

[mblanton]

I like the 17-40 L, but it's the only one I have. Most of the time I'm partial to the 28-135 IS.

Mike

[psk4363]

The 17-40 without a doubt!

Barry

[Andy_T]

The 28/1.8 mm.
Also, just use the camera in full manual mode.

That way, you'll exercise your feet when zooming and hone your composition skills :lol:

Best regards,
Andy