Best 13 mm to 85 mm lens choice

[boqueron]

An amateur photographer since...30 years and buying new equipment.
I have not yet decided which set of lenses to buy within the range from 13 mm to 85mm for an XT ( or could be a 20D:lol: ). I do not want ( don't need ) "profesional prices" per lens (1.000 $ up ).

50% will be City shooting architecture and people (I "need"many times less than a17 mm lens), 25 % of "Artistic" Holliday pìctures, 10% Some "live" protraits and 15% Landscapes.

My main ordered priorities are the following:

1.- Sharpness and optic quality
2.- Sharpness and optic quality ( no it's not a mistake )
3.- Reasonable (?) f-stop speed ( I will only carry a monopod)
4.- Less Weight and bulk ( I will have to carry the equipment daily during an 18 day trip )

Could you please give me your opinion on the following possible choices :

A.- Canon 10-22 + Tamron 28-70 ( + Wide Range / - concerns about a good copy Tamron ?)
B.- Canon 10-22 + Canon 17-85 ( + Wider range / -Not best sarpness in the 17-85 )
C.- Canon 10-22 + 50 1.8 + 85 1.8 ( Widest range and sharpness + Very luminous 50 1.8 / - Too many lenses to carry ? - heavier set by 100 gr - have to shift more lenses)
D.- Canon 17-40 + 85 1.8 ( + LIGHTEST + great 17-40 / - Will I miss the 50 - 70 range and the 14 -17 range ?)
E.- Canon 17-40 + Tamron 28-70 ( + great 17-40 / - Not wide enough ?)
F.- Canon 17-85 + Sigma ( Tamron ?) 14 mm
G.- Canon 17-85 + 50 1.8 ( Will miss the 14-17 mm range )

Number G seems the best travel light choice but I will wiss the wider side.

Which should I choose : A,B,C,D,E,F or G ?:rolleyes:

[pierrot]

C

[Andy_T]

Hi Boqueron,

welcome to the forum :D

Obviously you did your homework.
The lens choices and reasonings you put sound correct to me ... so basically only you can decide whether 17 mm is wide enough for you or whether you really need to have the 10-22.

Out of your options, my favourites would be E-D-C.
I would rank the remaining options A-G-F-B.

I have the 18-55 (which is not THAT bad), the Tamron 28-75, and the 50/1.8 (and some manual focus lenses).

I use the 28-75 most, with the 50/1.8 a close second. On my NOINK SLR, my favourite lens was a 24-50 lens, but I find that I very seldom use the 18-55 on the 20D. Maybe that is also due to a shift in my personal shooting preferences from landscape to people.

I am currently planning to get the 85/1.8 and the 70-200/4.0.

Best regards,
Andy

PS: I hope you don't mind, but your nickname sounds fishy to me :wink:

[lost]

I would pick up the 17-85 and try it for a while then decide if I needed the 10-22 or 14. You might find the 17-85 to suit your needs 99% of the time.

[boqueron]

Thanks to everybody.

A new (crazy? ) option : what if I take a canon 17-85 or the D option and, when needed wider views, I just Sticht the pictures with a Panoramic tool ? Can Panorama programs work in any mode (TIFFmode) ? Will I loose quality ? Oviously this will not work for candids or journalistic work...

BTW, Andythaler, well done: it IS fishy. My name is ...Fisch ( like the german one ) and I live in Spain.

[goatee]

boqueron - http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/digital-panoramas.shtml is a fantastic explanation of making digital panoramic photos.

[Andy_T]

A new (crazy? ) option : what if I take a canon 17-85 or the D option and, when needed wider views, I just Sticht the pictures with a Panoramic tool ?

Should work.

My personal take (sure others would disagree here) however is that the 18-55 gives similar quality in the wide area as the 17-85 (with less distortion and less flare). Haven't tested it myself, but have seen some comparisons.

18-55+28-75/2.8 +50/1.8 or 18-55+28-135 IS are both cheaper than the 17-85 alone.

Best regards,
Andy

PS: Y ~ de verdad ~ me gustan bastante los boquerones al vinagre!
(pardon my spelling, it's surely totally incorrect, I know to speak, but not to write some Spanish after living for some time in Barcelona:wink: )

[ggibbs1971]

I don't have the kit, but I recently sold my Sigma 18-125. I do a lot of indoor shots and needed more speed. So I got the Tamron 28-75. Also picked up the Sigma 20/1.8, but haven't used it much. So far I am happy, but do have an itch to sell the 20 and buy a WA zoom. Maybe the Tamron 17-35, or one of the superwides. Heck it is only money.

Geoff

[cactusclay]

Should work.

My personal take (sure others would disagree here) however is that the 18-55 gives similar quality in the wide area as the 17-85 (with less distortion and less flare). Haven't tested it myself, but have seen some comparisons.

18-55+28-75/2.8 +50/1.8 or 18-55+28-135 IS are both cheaper than the 17-85 alone.

Best regards,
Andy

PS: Y ~ de verdad ~ me gustan bastante los boquerones al vinagre!
(pardon my spelling, it's surely totally incorrect, I know to speak, but not to write some Spanish after living for some time in Barcelona:wink: )
I agree with Andy, for an inexpensive route. On the other hand if you plan on keeping lenses or if you plan on buying better glass in the future, you might consider starting out with something that you will not feel the need to upgrade in a few weeks or months. It may mean being a bit limited now, but it will also give you a chance to become familuar with what you use and have time to think about what you really need. ;)