Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 10 Oct 2012 (Wednesday) 12:31
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Walk around lens?

 
rick_reno
Cream of the Crop
44,642 posts
Likes: 134
Joined Dec 2010
     
Oct 11, 2012 09:52 |  #16

15-85 is hard to beat on a crop body, my 2nd choice would be the 17-55




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Lexar
Senior Member
297 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2012
     
Oct 11, 2012 18:55 |  #17

The 15-85 is closer on crop to 24-105 on FF then the 17-55.

I borrowed a friends 24-105 and compared to my 15-85 and the IQ was not distinguishable.
The 15-85 range on a crop is much more useful!

I tried a 17-55 in a store and although the subject separation and bokeh is better then the 15-85 due to 2.8 I just can't live with the range for a general walk around. I would always feel like I need wider and longer and will want to carry another 1 or 2 lenses.


Canon 70D | 15-85IS | Σ17-50/2.8 | Σ30/1.4 | 40/2.8 Pancake | 100/2.0 | 55-250STM | 430EXII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LowriderS10
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,170 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Mar 2008
Location: South Korea / Canada
     
Oct 12, 2012 09:33 |  #18

17-50/17-55


-=Prints For Sale at PIXELS=- (external link)
-=Facebook=- (external link)
-=Flickr=- (external link)

-=Gear=-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Oct 12, 2012 11:54 |  #19

There is no single answer because there are several possible approaches and which you choose sort of depend upon what other lenses you have now or plan to have and whether or not you are willing to carry one or two of them during your walk-around....

Me, I virtually always have at least a small camera bag and have both some fast primes, some tele zooms and an ultrawide specifically for my crop cameras. So I choose to combine those with a normal to moderate tele "walk-around" lens.

Someone wanting just a single lens or combining one with different wides or teles might make a different choice. For example...

The EF-S 15-85 might be ideal for someone only wanting to carry a single lens. It's wider than most walk-arounds and yet remains compact while offering up to moderate tele reach too. The trade off is that it's largely a daytime lens and doesn't offer larger apertures to strongly blur down backgrounds. IQ is high, plus it's a USM lens. Unfortunately, it's a "crop only" lens, so wouldn't be transferrable to full frame later.

An 18-135mm isn't as wide but has stronger tele capabilities. It's also an EF-S, crop only, but can be had relatively cheaply (especially if bought in kit with a camera). It has IS, but lacks USM. The newest version with STM focus might be similar, but only certain camera models can fully utilize it.

The EF-S 17-55/2.8 might be a premium choice if someone needs the large aperture for low light and more blurred down backgrounds. The trade-off is that the range of focal lengths is considerably narrower, along with price and size. However, it might be ideal if combined with an ultrawide and/or a tele zoom. It has both IS and USM, but is another "crop only" lens. OTOH, having a fast prime or two might offset the need for an f2.8 zoom.

The Tamron 17-50/2.8 non-VC is a popular, lower cost alternative to the Canon. There's also a version with VC, which is Tamron's version of IS, though most don't think it's as sharp and it costs more. My main concern would be focus speed and accuracy, since these lenses use a micro motor focusing system instead of the new USD focus Tamron has begun to offer on some models, which is more similar to Canon's USM.

In addition, there are the Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS and 17-70 f2.8-4 OS, which some people like a lot. Look for HSM on Sigma lenses if you want AF performance similar to Canon's USM. All these third party lenses are crop only.

There are lenses that are both crop and full frame capable to consider...

EF 28-135 can be a low cost option. It's actually a better lens than many people realize with IS and USM. Image quality is surprisingly good, but it's main weakness is that it's a wee bit soft racked all the way out at 135mm, but that can be offset by stopping down to around f8. At other focal lengths it's pretty usable at all apertures. It is not a fast lens, f3.5-5.6, so think mostly daylight and don't expect heavy background blur in many situations. There are also 28-90, 28-105 and some other older designs... don't know much about those.

EF 24-105/4L is sort of a premium version with better build and sealing... and of course a significantly higher price.

The EF 24-70/2.8 in either the original version or the new Mark II (which early reports suggest has incredible IQ), give you the big aperture, but at the cost of narrower range of focal lengths, higher price, as well as a larger and heavier lens.

There are also Sigma 24-70/2.8 and Tamron 24-70/2.8 (USD and VC) to consider.

With most of these, either a wide angle isn't important and needed, or if wide is important to you... they can pair up quite well with an ultrawide zoom such as an EF-S 10-22, Tokina 12-24, Sigma 10-20 or Tamron 10-24.

The 17-whatever options might not be wide enough for you either, in which case there are 11-16 and 8-16mm ultra, ultrawides to consider. The Tokina 11-16 is the fastest ultrawide with it's f2.8 aperture, though many people will find they stop a lens like this down most of the time anyway. The Sigma 8-16mm is the widest available non-fisheye lens for crop cameras, that makes for quite a bit of wide angle distortions in most situations, but goes where no other lens can go.

Also at the tele end, it can make a difference whether you're carrying around a 70-200 or, say, a 100-400 or 120-400. With a 70-200, you might be happy pairing it up with a faster mid-range zoom that leaves off at 50 or 55mm. Someone with one of the longer zooms might prefer a mid-range that reaches 135mm or at least 85mm.

Personally I use both crop and full frame cameras. So I have only one "crop only" lens, and that's an ultrawide zoom (Tokina 12-24). I use the 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 with it, on crop or full frame (and I have a wide prime 20/2.8 that I tend to use most on full frame). I also have the 28-135, which I use as a backup or when I want to lighten my load, such as when I need to hike a ways with my gear. It replaces both my 24-70 and 70-200 in my camera bag on those occcasions, quite a weight savings.

What you choose might be the same... or different. Get whatever fits your needs and into your kit best. I wouldn't put too much emphasis on future plans to add full frame because, on the one hand, it's pretty easy to sell off and replace a crop only lens if necessary. But, too, there's a lot of hype about full frame goodness... You should very carefully examine if you really need it. Frankly, IMO full frame is overkill for and wasted on a lot of shooters. They might be better served putting more into lenses or other accessories... or using the money's saved to take a trip that offers more opportunities to use their crop cameras.

Basically, to make this decision try to consider what other lenses you have or plan to use eventually, along with your purpose for the walk-around lens, if you want to travel light with just a single lens or if you usually carry a bag with two or several lenses. There are many choices, all of which can work, depending upon your particular needs.


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hennie
Goldmember
1,259 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 84
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Spijkenisse, The Netherlands
     
Oct 12, 2012 13:04 |  #20

If walk around for you means taking pictures as you walk around a high end P&S or 4/3 can deliver what you need.
I doubt if the extra effort and cost going together with a DSLR and high end lens will really show under these circumstances.
Consider this additional to any of the lenses recommended in the prior posts, they are all great when you do not need to travel light, react very fast or be unintrusive.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
monu2323
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
80 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Boston
     
Oct 12, 2012 15:49 |  #21

@amfoto1, I really appreciate for taking time and putting effort in writing up.

After reading all your thoughts and based on my experience and my needs I will build my arsenal like this: UWA(10-22/11-16), Standard Zoom(24-70), Prime(50 1.4, I already has this), TelePhoto(70-200 2.8)

Thank you all, I really appreciate all you for your thoughts.

I don't want to stop this thread by saying this. But if you have any different thoughts please share it might be helpfull for others.


Mohan
msgraphy.com (external link)
Gear
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
30,171 posts
Gallery: 263 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 7906
Joined Dec 2006
     
Oct 12, 2012 16:19 |  #22

monu2323 wrote in post #15114156 (external link)
@amfoto1, I really appreciate for taking time and putting effort in writing up.

After reading all your thoughts and based on my experience and my needs I will build my arsenal like this: UWA(10-22/11-16), Standard Zoom(24-70), Prime(50 1.4, I already has this), TelePhoto(70-200 2.8)

Thank you all, I really appreciate all you for your thoughts.

I don't want to stop this thread by saying this. But if you have any different thoughts please share it might be helpfull for others.

That will be a nice arsenal, but it sort of skirts the idea of a walkaround lens. Its a walkaround with 3 lenses, a different proposition. If you substituted a 17-55 in for the 24-70 you still have a kit that covers the same range except 55-70 which you will not miss, and still have a full fledged walkaround lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scrumhalf
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,778 posts
Gallery: 83 photos
Likes: 4517
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Pasadena CA and Portland OR
     
Oct 12, 2012 16:25 |  #23

I'm thinking of a 15-85 as my first lens purchase beyond the bundle I got with the camera. I've only heard good things about it and the range would then justify my getting a 70-200 after that :D


Sam
5D4 | 6D | 7D2 (2 bodies) | Reasonably good glass
Gear List

If I don't get the shots I want with the gear I have, the only optics I need to examine is the mirror on the bathroom wall. The root cause will be there.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lexar
Senior Member
297 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2012
     
Oct 12, 2012 16:26 |  #24

it depends what camera you have and what you want.. but just as a point:

The 24-70 is very heavy, expensive and really meant for a full frame.
I never tried it personally but read many times that on a crop the image quality is no better then the 15-85 or the 17-55.

I also find that for walk around the range will be fairly limited and you will need to carry multiple lenses and even more important feel the need to switch lenses a lot.

I chose the 15-85 for exactly that reason.. less switching more range. Do not feel the need for UWA and unless I really want a zoom do not feel the need for longer.
I also have a prime (f1.4) for low light which gives me much better low light if needed then the f2.8.


Canon 70D | 15-85IS | Σ17-50/2.8 | Σ30/1.4 | 40/2.8 Pancake | 100/2.0 | 55-250STM | 430EXII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
unistudent1962
Member
166 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Brisbane QLD Australia
     
Oct 12, 2012 16:42 |  #25

15-85 makes a fabulous walkaround lens. It's sharp, provides fast accurate focussing, and excellent contrast and colour rendition. The only possible downside is the variable maximum aperture. To some this is a deal-breaker, to others its something that simply needs to be worked around. For me, it rarely presents a problem.

IMO don't get caught up on the "I'll probably go full frame eventually" scenario. Buy the best lens you can for what you want to use it for NOW. IF an EF 28-70/105 is going to do the job for you on a crop, but one, if it's not buy the 15-86 or 17-55 and resell them if and when you go FF, both lenses hold their value pretty well.


Canon 70D w/Grip l Canon 60D w/Grip l EF 100-400 F4.5-5.6L IS l EF 70-200 f4L IS l EF-S 15-85 f3.5-5.6 IS USM l EF 100mm f2.8 USM Macro l EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM l EF 50 f1.8 II l EF-S 10-22 f3.5-4.5 USM l 430 EX II Flash l Manfrotto 055XPROB + 498RC2 Tripod l Benro MP-96 M8 Monopod l Lowepro Vertex 200 AW Backpack l Lowepro Pro Runner 300 AW Backpack l PS CS5 Extended l Lightroom 4.3

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
T.D.
Moderator
Avatar
33,669 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 199
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
     
Oct 12, 2012 16:56 |  #26

Okay, folks, time too cool off before we impose a cooling off that you likely won't enjoy.



Take a picture, it lasts longer (external link)
(My Gallery) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alazgr8
Member
Avatar
233 posts
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Orange County, CA.
     
Oct 12, 2012 18:40 as a reply to  @ T.D.'s post |  #27

The EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM is my choice for a walk around lens. It is equivelent to a 27-88, and most of my photo's are close ups. I have a EF 28-135 f/3.6-5.6 IS USM and the speed and IQ of the 17-55 blows it away, not that I am saying they are comparable lenses. Since the 17-55 is an EF-S lens it wont work on a FF body. Next year I plan on getting a FF body, so I will probably get the new 24-70 f/2.8 IS USM II. I have read a few reviews of the 24-70 II and the 17-55 gets mentioned for it's comparable IQ. It's a bummer that the 24-70 II is more than twice as expensive as the 17-55, but that's the price you have to pay for quality. Btw, Amfoto1, great reply!! -rick


Rick S.
My Gear = Canon 50d ~ EF 100 f/2.8L IS USM Macro ~ EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS USM ~ EF-S 17-55 IS USM f/2.8 IS ~ EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM ~ EF 28-135 IS f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jerbear00
Goldmember
1,113 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Southern California
     
Oct 13, 2012 01:21 as a reply to  @ post 15107313 |  #28

35L


5d3 & Lens CoLLector
Gear List/Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jasalvas
Member
109 posts
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Golden Gate
     
Oct 13, 2012 19:40 |  #29

When I was in Italy I only had the 24-70 on my 60D. It performed beautifully but there were times when it was just not wide enough. I might even recommend the 17-40. I saw someone mention the 15-85 for the time you shoot crop and sell it when you upgrade. In that case you might even look at the 18-200.


| Fredo | 5DMKIII | 24-105 L |17-40 L | Nikkor 50mm | Billingham Hadley Pro |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Superdaantje
Senior Member
Avatar
557 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Netherlands
     
Oct 14, 2012 08:18 |  #30

Jasalvas wrote in post #15118592 (external link)
I saw someone mention the 15-85 for the time you shoot crop and sell it when you upgrade. In that case you might even look at the 18-200.

Did you ever use the 15-85 ? it is a total other league than the 18-200. :o


Wagner.photography -  (external link) Workshops photography in the Netherlands & Indonesia -_-
Gear list (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,210 views & 0 likes for this thread
Walk around lens?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is kenf
683 guests, 282 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.