Canon walkabout lens on a budget???

Snydremark wrote in post #9292306
If you're on a budget and can accept a "slower" lens, I think it's pretty hard to beat the Tamron 18-270 f/3.5-5.6 VC. The only reason I'm finally looking to replace mine is that I want larger apertures; I just don't get the chance to shoot much in well lit conditions

Aside from that, the Tammy's lived on my 40D for nearly a year and half now. The VC on mine appears to work way better than the IS on my 100-400L, and it's a nice, compact and light lens for general shooting. Plus, the "full" 18-270 range (28-432 35mm equivalent) is just SUPER nice.

@30mm:

@270mm:

And this lens goes for right around $500 these days; so the price is definitely right.

Is it better than the 55-250?

I guess the question is, were you looking for a mid-range telephoto zoom or a wide to midrange zoom.

The 24-105 is a good lens but on a crop format like the 7D it is the same as a 38.4mm, or near normal, to 168mm, or telephoto range.

As a walkabout with the APS, or 1.6 crop, in order to have the ability to do widescapes as well as portraits and critters at a distance, you would best be served by a 15-85mm as Kenji said--or for greater reach, if you are into wildlife, one of the 17 or 18-200 zooms. That Tamron 17-270 VR, for instance.

Remember that the 7D is a heavier model, adding the 24-105 will make it much weightier--a walkabout should be a combo you don't hesitate to throw around your neck on a daily basis.

I went through a four-month trip to Europe with an XTi and a 17-85 around my neck most of the time (one of two other lenses the rest of the time) in 2007. This year I returned for a month carrying a 5DM2 and the 24-105 and I remember thinking that I should have brought the 50D and my 17-85 instead.

Wow you must be pretty sensative to weight to sway your opinion about what to walk around with.

18-85 = 475g

24-105L = 670g

70-200 f/4 = 705g

XTi = 510g

50D = 740g

5D2 = 810g

7D = 820g

advaitin wrote in post #9295661
I guess the question is, were you looking for a mid-range telephoto zoom or a wide to midrange zoom.

The 24-105 is a good lens but on a crop format like the 7D it is the same as a 38.4mm, or near normal, to 168mm, or telephoto range.

As a walkabout with the APS, or 1.6 crop, in order to have the ability to do widescapes as well as portraits and critters at a distance, you would best be served by a 15-85mm as Kenji said--or for greater reach, if you are into wildlife, one of the 17 or 18-200 zooms. That Tamron 17-270 VR, for instance.

Remember that the 7D is a heavier model, adding the 24-105 will make it much weightier--a walkabout should be a combo you don't hesitate to throw around your neck on a daily basis.

I went through a four-month trip to Europe with an XTi and a 17-85 around my neck most of the time (one of two other lenses the rest of the time) in 2007. This year I returned for a month carrying a 5DM2 and the 24-105 and I remember thinking that I should have brought the 50D and my 17-85 instead.

crowflyawa wrote in post #9297104
Wow you must be pretty sensative to weight to sway your opinion about what to walk around with.

18-85 = 475g

24-105L = 670g

70-200 f/4 = 705g

XTi = 510g

50D = 740g

5D2 = 810g

7D = 820g

The 50D and 17-85 combo would weigh 265 grams less, or about .58 pounds. My whole kit weighed 45 pounds this last time, so perhaps I was being sensitive about an ounce here or there. But I am in the process of deciding how to save a pound or two--or ten for the next trip.

Seriously, I've found as I get older that I want less hanging round my neck. One of the reasons I've started using Up-straps, which hang nicely on the shoulder without slipping.

advaitin wrote in post #9297441
Seriously, I've found as I get older that I want less hanging round my neck. One of the reasons I've started using Up-straps, which hang nicely on the shoulder without slipping.

I can understand what you mean, I too am sensative to 1-2 lbs of differance in my kits. I didnt mean to sound overly critical before, if I did. I've had 2 back surgeries and I'm only 32 but since I cant work out and my Dr's tell me not to lift over 10lbs I have to be careful what I put on the camera or in the bag I carry.

Cheers!

crowflyawa wrote in post #9298190
I can understand what you mean, I too am sensative to 1-2 lbs of differance in my kits. I didnt mean to sound overly critical before, if I did. I've had 2 back surgeries and I'm only 32 but since I cant work out and my Dr's tell me not to lift over 10lbs I have to be careful what I put on the camera or in the bag I carry.

Cheers!

Are you in the UK? How was your experience with the docs in your system. We hear all sorts of things about it--most slanted to get US folks to reject any form of universal health.

As far as the sounding critical, don't worry. My wife, on the other hand, was really unhappy with the amount of gear I carried on my back, especially after an errant suitcase knocked me off my feet while I was entering the up escalator at the Nice train station. I was on my back--the pack between me and the escalator jagged step edges, head downward, feet up. No one knew where the kill button was and my wife grabbing the handle on top of the pack couldn't pull me back off the ever-moving up steps. Fortunately a young couple came to our assistance and pulled me off.

I'm of two minds about it. without the pack I might have retained my balance and footing better, but with the pack, assuming that suitcase would have knocked me off my feet anyway, I was well protected from injury. I was trying to help kick back off and my legs got a bit chewed by the escalator--just scratches, really.

I should add--I now know how a turtle must feel when overturned.

Considering the OP has a 10-22mm in his arsenal, I think he can go with the 24-105mm and cover everything he would need with only an extra lens and a flash in a small bag.

Oh man maybe I shouldn’t, but I had to laugh at your sorry, good one-

I’m in the USA, Oklahoma; my med insurance paid for most everything fine fortunately.
My back is doing great overall, and the Dr who did both my surgeries (2 years apart) was simply great. However, as the normal healing for my procedure takes many years for ‘normal’ to return, and will never be the same as before or without some pain with exertion. However my weight limit should go up with time for certain. Mostly the pain I have is nerve related, but not from the Dr it was from the injury. I was in a series of near fatal car accidents which added up to my back breaking twice. First time a few disks ruptured hard material into my spinal cord and took weeks of extreme agony before they could do surgery due to complications but following the surgery 1 week later it was all over like nothing ever happened. Within a few months I was water skiing again. Then 2 years later I was struck by someone running a red light (again) and nearly killed. Cracked hip and broken vertebrae left me with a fusion of 3 vertebrae and on crutches for 18 weeks + years of pain and recovery.

advaitin wrote in post #9298539
Are you in the UK? How was your experience with the docs in your system. We hear all sorts of things about it--most slanted to get US folks to reject any form of universal health.

As far as the sounding critical, don't worry. My wife, on the other hand, was really unhappy with the amount of gear I carried on my back, especially after an errant suitcase knocked me off my feet while I was entering the up escalator at the Nice train station. I was on my back--the pack between me and the escalator jagged step edges, head downward, feet up. No one knew where the kill button was and my wife grabbing the handle on top of the pack couldn't pull me back off the ever-moving up steps. Fortunately a young couple came to our assistance and pulled me off.

I'm of two minds about it. without the pack I might have retained my balance and footing better, but with the pack, assuming that suitcase would have knocked me off my feet anyway, I was well protected from injury. I was trying to help kick back off and my legs got a bit chewed by the escalator--just scratches, really.

I should add--I now know how a turtle must feel when overturned.

crowflyawa wrote in post #9299638
Oh man maybe I shouldn’t, but I had to laugh at your sorry, good one-

I got you mixed up with the OP, these little brain shorts happen. Heck, I laughed about it myself at the time. My wife really frets over things like that. Over the years I've gone from taking calculated risks for a little thrill to having little bits of excitement sneak up on me when I'm not expecting it. I suppose one of these days there'll be one excitement too many. I've given up on fast motorcycles (but I do ride a 650cc motorscooter) and I have a bum knee so running and kicking a ball, skiing, and most sports are out. The last time I did any real rock work, taking a calculated risk going down a face I hadn't climbed up, I had one of those sneak attacks of excitement, slipping several feet before catching a small outcrop of rock with my left hand before a big drop. The following month a climber was killed falling from the same spot.

So, I've slowly become conservative--and it just goes to show that being careful is no guarantee of safety--even on an escalator. And yes, LOL.

I still dont know which way to go, i have a 7D anyways... but 15-85mm or 24-105mmL?