Upgrade for walkabout lens

I am mostly into urban photography. I currently have:

Tamron AF 18-250mm 3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro Standard Zoom Camera Lens for Canon EOS (current retail is about $450) (my first "walkabout" lens purchase as a total newbie) and
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Standard Zoom Digital Camera Lens (current retail is about $540) which was my second "walkabout" lens purchase, which I've been using the most on urban photowalks).

As my photography skills have improved since these purchases, I realize that it may be time to upgrade my walkabout lens to better/faster glass.

1. Will I be able to sell these lenses or are they outdated?

2. What "L" quality lens(es) should I check out to replace these focal lengths?

Any advice/suggestions are greatly appreciated!! Thanks! Carla

1. IMO, you might be able to sell em for at least half the price you paid for give/take.
2. I would recommend the 17-40, 24-105, 85mm, or the 70-200 f/4 or f/2.8 IS or NON IS

From the list of past lenses I would suggest the 24-105 great walk about lense.

I use the 24-105 as a walkabout lens pn my 40D and love it.

1. You can sell anything, but you need to be realistic about how much you'll get for them. I would think the 17-85 will sell without a problem. I don't know anything about your other lens.

2. If I were you I would sell both and get a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, and if you can afford it, an 85 f/1.8 to keep a bit of length. If you're looking for something to replace the 18-250 focal lengths, you're going to be spending quite a bit if you want "L" quality.

24-105. my go to lens for outdoor carry, especially if shooting from cars, boats, etc.

If you want something "better/faster" than your 17-85 as a walkaround lens then I suggest the Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM. I am in a situation similar to yours and I see it as the logical successor to the 17-85. The wide aperture w/ IS makes it a great choice for low light shooting, and it has a reputation for being very sharp. It is not an "L", but from what I understand it comes pretty close.

supremeguyx wrote in post #8704332
1. IMO, you might be able to sell em for at least half the price you paid for give/take.
2. I would recommend the 17-40, 24-105, 85mm, or the 70-200 f/4 or f/2.8 IS or NON IS

Jaytypes wrote in post #8704368
From the list of past lenses I would suggest the 24-105 great walk about lense.

krb wrote in post #8704378
I use the 24-105 as a walkabout lens pn my 40D and love it.

shooter mcgavin wrote in post #8704455
1. You can sell anything, but you need to be realistic about how much you'll get for them. I would think the 17-85 will sell without a problem. I don't know anything about your other lens.

2. If I were you I would sell both and get a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, and if you can afford it, an 85 f/1.8 to keep a bit of length. If you're looking for something to replace the 18-250 focal lengths, you're going to be spending quite a bit if you want "L" quality.

birdfromboat wrote in post #8704948
24-105. my go to lens for outdoor carry, especially if shooting from cars, boats, etc.

rhurwitz wrote in post #8705063
If you want something faster then I suggest the Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM. I am in a situation similar to yours and I see it as the logical successor to the 17-85. The wide aperture w/ IS makes it a great choice for low light shooting, and it has a reputation for being very sharp. It is not an "L", but from what I understand it comes pretty close.

Thank you all so much for your responses. I should have mentioned that I'm using a XSi. I see that the 24-105L is a highly recommended lens, but I wish it was a 2.8 and I would still need a wide angle as well. The 17-55 has the speed, but not the L quality, altho as stated, I've read that the glass is pretty good so I'll keep that in mind. I see that the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is really affordable and it has decent reviews on Amazon, even without IS. I'll do my homework on these three lenses .. I guess first I need to choose a priority -- a faster lens or L glass/IS. My other lenses are the nifty-fifty, the 100mm f/2.8L and a Sigma 120-400mm, so I'm already covered on the longer focal length.

Thanks again!

I do believe the 17-55 definetly has the "L quality" as far as IQ. The glass is quite a bit better than "pretty good". But if you were referring to the build, youre right, its no where near an L. All that said, do check out that Tamron 17-50mm 2.8. The IQ is close to the 17-55mm 2.8 and its lighter and cheaper, a great bargain. Don't be so focused on needing an L lens. Get a lens that gets outstanding reviews and has great IQ. If it's an L, fine. If not, that's fine too.

nightcat wrote in post #8705479
I do believe the 17-55 definetly has the "L quality" as far as IQ. The glass is quite a bit better than "pretty good". But if you were referring to the build, youre right, its no where near an L. All that said, do check out that Tamron 17-50mm 2.8. The IQ is close to the 17-55mm 2.8 and its lighter and cheaper, a great bargain. Don't be so focused on needing an L lens. Get a lens that gets outstanding reviews and has great IQ. If it's an L, fine. If not, that's fine too.

+1. The 17-55 is simply outstanding. It doesn't have "L" build per se, but the build isn't bad either. I felt it was solid. The tamron is definitely worth checking out as well.

Also, keep in mind a 24-70 L. It may be a bit short for you, however on an XSi crop sensor you will gain. When I was in this similar situation, I shot with both the 24-70 & 24-105 and had better results with the 24-70, mainly to the fact of the apeture, 2.8 vs. 4.

nightcat wrote in post #8705479
I do believe the 17-55 definetly has the "L quality" as far as IQ. The glass is quite a bit better than "pretty good". But if you were referring to the build, youre right, its no where near an L. All that said, do check out that Tamron 17-50mm 2.8. The IQ is close to the 17-55mm 2.8 and its lighter and cheaper, a great bargain. Don't be so focused on needing an L lens. Get a lens that gets outstanding reviews and has great IQ. If it's an L, fine. If not, that's fine too.

Jeff81 wrote in post #8705498
+1. The 17-55 is simply outstanding. It doesn't have "L" build per se, but the build isn't bad either. I felt it was solid. The tamron is definitely worth checking out as well.

Extra Medium wrote in post #8705531
Also, keep in mind a 24-70 L. It may be a bit short for you, however on an XSi crop sensor you will gain. When I was in this similar situation, I shot with both the 24-70 & 24-105 and had better results with the 24-70, mainly to the fact of the apeture, 2.8 vs. 4.

Thanks everyone .. I appreciate the additional info and recommendations. I want a lens that will be significantly better than the 17-85, so it looks like I have several choices to research.

Oh, one more question -- is POTN the best place to try to sell my lens?

luvsadog2 wrote in post #8705722
Thanks everyone .. I appreciate the additional info and recommendations. I want a lens that will be significantly better than the 17-85, so it looks like I have several choices to research.

Oh, one more question -- is POTN the best place to try to sell my lens?

I have never bought lens(es) off of the internet. I always test shoot first. Not saying that users here (or on other sites) are not credible, but at the same time, you want to know what you have in your hands, is what you are going to get. This is my personal opinion and I'm definiently not saying that you should not buy used bodys or lens by other users from this site.. or any site. Make sure that you know that the seller is reliable is the point that I'm trying to make.

Extra Medium wrote in post #8705814
I have never bought lens(es) off of the internet. I always test shoot first. Not saying that users here (or on other sites) are not credible, but at the same time, you want to know what you have in your hands, is what you are going to get. This is my personal opinion and I'm definiently not saying that you should not buy used bodys or lens by other users from this site.. or any site. Make sure that you know that the seller is reliable is the point that I'm trying to make.

I was planning on buying new, but selling the two lens I want to replace. I realize I won't get as much for them as I paid. I've occasionally looked at the POTN buy/sell threads and it appears that people do buy used lense all the time. I'd probably take my lens to my camera shop to get their appraisal of the condition and current worth of my lenses before putting them up for sale.

Keep in mind that any local camera shop will ask you a significant amount less than what your lens is worth even though they know the lens is a 9/10 easy. Example: your 24-70 would be $1100 but they'll ask $800 to $900 9 out of 10 times. Correct me if I'm wrong (seniors) , but I'm fairly sure this is how they make they're money back off used bodys & lenses.