17-85 IS & 70-300 DO IS travel combo advice

[nitsch]

I am very seriously considering getting the 17-85mm EF-S IS and the 70-300mm DO IS as a lightweight compact travel duo.

I have read a lot of reviews on each lens and each one seems to have its supporters but also I have seen a fair few negative comments about them too.

These two lenses are both quite expensive here in the UK, so I'll be looking at spending about 1200GBP :eek: to buy them both new (neither seem to be going that much cheaper second hand). This is a lot of money so I want to get it right!!!

I know Skip Souza has this combo so hopefully he'll see this thread and give his thoughts but if you have got these lenses, what do you think of this idea? Or else can you suggest a two lens set which will give this range and compactness whilst retaining quality?

Thanks in advance. :)

[condyk]

In theory it looks great, but are you sure about the image quality with these two fella's? I know there are some big fans of the DO here but I've yet to see an image to convince me it's worth nearly £1000. Neither score that well at fredmiranda and that with lots of owner reviews to average scoring out, not just a few. Both score around the 7.5/10 range.

Now, it's a totally different debate about portability and its use as a travel lens. The criteria change and maybe it is the bee's knees in that regard, esp with a Kenko Pro 1.4x. Small, lightish, very decent quality and great length. But ... I'd find it hard to accept its quality limitations. Maybe someone can post convincing images.

I've thought hard about travel lenses myself. Travel and photography are my big interests, in that order. My first stab at a traverl lens, the Canon 28-135mm IS, really didn't turn me on at all when I had it although it ticked so many 'travel' related boxes.

My guess from your previously posted images with the Sigma 70-300mm APO is you would be able to squeeze every last ounce of performance from this combo and so maybe they can do it for you ... if you don't mind the money side.

Personally, at the wider/walkaround end, I am looking at the 18-50mm Sigma EX DC 2.8. I dunno what IS could add to the sub 100mm range. This is a sharp and wide and fast lens and so seems to be a better option than the IS ... and you save £200 or so. No good for full frame camera tho'. fstopjojo did a test so worth checking it out.

http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests

I think I'd also go the 70-200mm f4 with 1.4x TCon route for the longer end and save another £500. Not too heavy and obviously has the quality. Good resale is nice too. I need longer for my main wildlife interest, but this would be a nice city/candids/building/landscapes style combo. The cash saved would really be substantial.

Where are you heading off to anyway?

[nitsch]

Thanks for taking the time to respond Condyk, I appreciate it.

Yep, I too have reservations about the image quality of both of these lenses (particularly the 70-300) and the price (for this money I could buy the 100-400 I so desire!) but there is something about the compact nature of the 70-300 that really appeals to me for travel. I guess the Sigma 70-300 APO I have at the moment is fairly lightweight but I want better quality at the 300mm end without getting something which resembles a bazooka! :) Thanks for your kind comments about me squeezing every ounce of performance out of it, I guess I know it's limitations and have learnt to work around them, but often this relys on good conditions (lighting wise) so the IS on the 70-300 DO is quite appealing.

I have heard that the 17-85 is better than the 24-85 which I currently own and it has the extra mm's at the wide end which would be welcome. If anyone out there has owned both, then please let me know.

Myself and the wife are off to tour British Columbia for 2 1/2 weeks in September so there will be everything from landscapes to whale watching and given how much it is costing us to go it seems silly to skimp on the camera gear and feel I haven't got the right kit once I'm there, but at the same time the size/weight constraints are quite tight.

[Tom W]

I can't say whether the 17-85 is optically better than the 24-85 or not, but it does have the advantage of an extended wide-angle range, which is very useful on the 1.6X sensor (it also enjoys the status of costing twice the price, which is why the 24-85 sits on my Rebel XT). The extended wide end is a great plus, though - I took the XT on a weekend trip and found myself putting the 16-35 on the XT quite a bit. I prefer not to have to swap lenses when walking with a group of non-photographers, and if I'm hiking, I prefer a one-lens solution. That puts the 17-85 in a favorable position.

The 70-300 is a good lens, and it has a very good IS system. Optically, it's not quite as sharp as the 100-400, but it's very good. It has its quirks and flare can be induced more easily than with other lenses, but if you want a big lens in a small package with great IS, it is worthwhile. Get used to its characteristics and you will get very nice images with the DO zoom.

[martook]

I'd just like to add a couple of links that I found really interesting. Of course, to really appreciate the 70-300 DO IS lens, you need to have size/weight as one (well, two I guess...) of your most important aspects regarding the lens. This depends on you as a person, and how you will travel. If you are going on a safari where you will spend a lot of time in one car, the 100-400 is probably a great lens. If you are going backpacking, travelling by bus, train, minibus, boat and plane - you have to be insane to bring the 100-400 :)

Anyway, back to the links. First, have a look at what Michael Reichmann brought with him:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/bangladesh-bags.shtml

and then have a look at what he actually used:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/bangla-worked.shtml

So, is this lens up to L-standard? Short answer: No.
I think you really have to learn where this lens is good (there is a good review of the lens at the same site as the links above), to be able to get the most out of the lens. This of course applies to all lenses, but I just got a feeling this one is a bit trickier than others.


Personally, I am planning on using the following setup when traveling:
Canon 17-40L as a walk around lens, for landscapes and in cities.
Canon 70-300 DO IS as telezoom, when shooting wildlife (also bringing Kenko 1.4x) and so on.

A fast lens for portraits, low light work etc.
Haven't decided which lens to go for here... Choosing between:
Canon 50mm 1.4
Canon 85mm 1.8
Canon 60mm 2.8
The 60mm has the advantage of being a macro lens as well, which can be a nice addition to the kit... bad thing is that it's not quite as fast as the other two.

With those three lenses I think I will have most things covered, and should be a good and not too heavy kit.

[lmele]

Hey Nitsch
AS i am new to this forum i spent a bit of time reading people's thoughts recomendations and ideas, and in the end i went out and bought a 20D with the 17-85mm and the 70-300 DO lenses and thus far i am very happy with this combination.
For me i find that both lenses work great as a general walk around and i am very pleased with the results i get. Would it be possible if you asked the store to give you a few shots with your camera and then study them at home before bying, I made that deal with my store and said if im not happy i will bye different lenses. As far as weight goes with the 70-300 Do most of the weight i find is centered with the camera.

[Salleke]

I am very seriously considering getting the 17-85mm EF-S IS and the 70-300mm DO IS as a lightweight compact travel duo.

I have read a lot of reviews on each lens and each one seems to have its supporters but also I have seen a fair few negative comments about them too.

These two lenses are both quite expensive here in the UK, so I'll be looking at spending about 1200GBP :eek: to buy them both new (neither seem to be going that much cheaper second hand). This is a lot of money so I want to get it right!!!

I know Skip Souza has this combo so hopefully he'll see this thread and give his thoughts but if you have got these lenses, what do you think of this idea? Or else can you suggest a two lens set which will give this range and compactness whilst retaining quality?

Thanks in advance. :)

Like you I want to buy the same lenses and I'm esitaiting.
Decisions, allways decisions ... :confused: :confused: :confused:

[nitsch]

Guys thanks for all your comments. Martook thanks for those links, very interesting reading.

I actually had time to go into a local camera store and handle both of these lenses, the 17-85 was in many ways very similar in feel to the 24-85 I currently own but the 70-300 was an impressive lens indeed and the IS was extremely effective. I plan to return with my 300D body to reel off some test shots so I can view them on my PC back home.

A couple of you have mentioned using the 70-300 DO with a 1.4x converter - is this possible? I was under the impression that the 1.4x TC wouldn't fit this lens. It would be very cool if it did though! :D

[condyk]

Nick

Check out Dante's long thread on the DO: there is discussion there of the Kenko Pro 300 1.4x TCon, which doesn't have the extending front lens. I can vouch that this is a very decent TCon.

[nitsch]

Ok thanks Condyk, I'll have a read.

[Skip Souza]

Nick,
I just now got back from the MotoGP at Laguna Seca. I've gotta rehydrate from an hour of riding in 100 degree F. First three hours along the coast and street dancing in the coast range was much more fun. I'll see if I got anything worth posting tonight.
Condyk is right that for the money you pay for the DO you are not going to get L quality Images, But you won't be getting bad images either. What you are paying for is the an awesome IS in a compact format that is great for travel and still has the reach that can be increased with a TC. The 17-85 IS does not cost near as much and still has a nice range and a wonderful IS.
Everything is a compromise. You need to pick a kit that fits your needs. This combination fits my needs , especially when traveling on my motorcycle. I too lust after the 100-400 L, and someday I will have it but I will use it differently, i.e. it will fill different needs for me.
Now that everything is surley clear a mud, go for it, what ever IT may be.
Skip

More water please :-)

[nitsch]

Thanks for your comments Skip - especially when you're frazzled! :)

I've seen enough sample images to know I'm not going to get L quality images from the 70-300 but the IS and improvement in quality over the kit I have at the moment in such a compact format kind of makes it seem worthwhile to me. As you so rightly say everything is a compromise, if I got the 100-400 I would get better images but on the other hand I wouldn't be able to take it with me everywhere. One day I hope to have the 100-400 L but as you say it will have a different purpose in life than the 70-300 DO.

Hopefully after I have taken some sample shots myself my mind will be made up for sure. Maybe. ;) :lol:

[Skip Souza]

P.S.
I have used several lower quality lenses (Tamron 28-300, kit, 75-300 IS, to name a few. It is my opinion that all of them are of pretty fair quality, you just have to work harder with some them to get the best photos. Of course the see in the dark f/2.8 and better lenses makes everything much easier but there is a real cost in size, weight and MONEY.
My wife has the 16-35 f/2.8 L and the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and will hane the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS. The Tamron is the only exception to the cost rule but it still takes her three lenses and MUCH more money to get the same coverage that I get. Not to mention a larger camera bag ;_0

[MrChad]

Nitsche,

Why not sell your Sigma tele and get just the 70-300 DO and pair it with your 24-85mm or 18-55mm for travel? The 17-85mm IS would seem fairly redudant in terms of optical quality compared to your 18-55 and 24-85mm.

Else, the review that recommended the 24-70L and the DO seamed like a really great combo to me.

[Dante King]

I think your plan of the 17-85 and DO make sense. I cant talk about the 17-85, BUT I DO love my 70-300 DO. I just got back form vacation and this lens served me well. In fact it has been serving me well with the kenko 300DG 1.4 TC for some time. Love the lens and the TC combo.

[helmus]

I use this combo (EOS350D + 17-85 and 70-300DO) for travel and I'm very happy with this. I know the weakness of the DO and I can live with this. BUT!!! this is my travel set! For birding, landscape, portrait, macro etc I prefer the heavyweight 1D with L lenses.

[Skip Souza]

I use this combo (EOS350D + 17-85 and 70-300DO) for travel and I'm very happy with this. I know the weakness of the DO and I can live with this. BUT!!! this is my travel set! For birding, landscape, portrait, macro etc I prefer the heavyweight 1D with L lenses.
Excellent assessment. Now I just need to work on the 1D and the L's :lol: