Walkaround lens suggestions

I got a 400D this summer after deciding I really wanted a SLR, enough to spend my whole summer working for one, and I love it.

I found that the kit lens wasn't cutting it for range and speed, and got a Sigma 70-300 and 50 f/1.8. Now I want a general zoom that is faster, hopefully has IS, and has better AF.

The most important factors for me are faster autofocus and better low-light capabilities. I know I can't approach the low-light capabilities of the 50 1.8, but something better than the kit lens would be nice. I was thinking there are two ways to approach this: IS or a faster aperture. I would like IS, but it isn't necessary.

Whether it's an EF or EF-S doesn't matter; I won't be upgrading to a full-frame body for a long time. Brand also doesn't matter, as long as it's a good lens.

I realize that an L would be ideal, but I don't have the money (and spending <$1000 on a lens isn't feasible in the foreseeable future)

I've considered are Canon 17-85 IS USM, which looks quite good: USM and IS, and can be purchased used for quite a discount.

Any opinions or lens recommendations?

EF-S 17-55 - I think it'd be your perfect choice. Price is close to 1k, but not normally more than that.

Tamron 17-50/2.8

I forgot to mention: I'm a high school student, which limits my income, so keeping it at or below $400-500 is necessary.

Thanks for the suggestions so far, though.

The Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 is great for everyday use IMO and I have found that the colours it can produce are very impressive. The only problem is being a 82mm filter size, filters can be a bit on the pricey side. Great alternative to the Canon "L" equivalent.

Doesnt seem to cover the wide angle as much but I prefer it as my walkabout lens.

I think the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is your best bet.

Don Quioxte wrote in post #4568440
I'm a high school student, which limits my income...

Canon 18-55 IS ?

SoundsGood wrote in post #4568649
Canon 18-55 IS ?

I've definitely considered that, but it doesn't need to be that inexpensive. I'm more concerned with getting a quality lens.

The main thing I don't like about the 18-55 IS is no USM. I'll have to check the focus speed next time I'm in a camera store, though.

I would have to agree with
elysium Sigma 24-70 f/2.8
This is what I use for an walk lens

I'm making a list of lenses I want to try, and I'll stop by a camera store to test them out.

The trend I'm seeing is "aperture > IS", or at least for this price range. Is this (generally) the case?

canon 24-105 f/4 IS

Try the 24-85.Its not overly fast in low light but if your on a budget and you dont care if you get an ef-s lens,then its something to consider.I have kept this lens on my elan 7 and took it to Mexico on my 20d this year and it performed flawlesly.Regards GORDO

another vote for tamron 17-50 2.8

the sigma 24-70 is a great lens, but i found 24 wasnt wide enough and went with the sigma 17-70, all three of these choices are excellent

Don Quioxte wrote in post #4568998
The main thing I don't like about the 18-55 IS is no USM

If you must have ring-type AF, you are really limited for your specified budget. The 1785 IS is, as you know, a contender, but it has its weaknesses. The 1755IS is out due to price. That really only leaves the 1740L. Maybe get it used?

Or, step into the world of primes and you open up some real nice options (e.g., 30f1.4 HSM, 28f1.8 USM).

LightRules wrote in post #4569408
If you must have ring-type AF, you are really limited for your specified budget. The 1785 IS is, as you know, a contender, but it has its weaknesses. The 1755IS is out due to price. That really only leaves the 1740L. Maybe get it used?

Or, step into the world of primes and you open up some real nice options (e.g., 30f1.4 HSM, 28f1.8 USM).

While doing some research, I found that it's not necessarily USM that I need, it's just fast and accurate AF, which is true of USM lenses more so than non-USM. I'm going to try before I buy, so I'll gauge for myself if it's fast enough. And I don't mind going third party, which creates more possibilities.

I love my 50mm prime. It's such a wonderful lens, it just doesn't have the versatility of a zoom. It fills its niche very nicely, as primes seem to do, but I want a zoom lens for general purpose shooting.

I'm steering more towards the wider lenses (17-50 2.8 especially. The more I read, the more I like it. I want to test it out in person.)