Progressing From An 18-55mm Kit Lens

Hi folks,

I use a Canon 450D and have had the 18-55mm kit lens which i've been very pleased with the results from.

I feel that I now want to "upgrade" this lens and progress quality-wise.

I'd be very interested in your opinions on what a good quality improvement of this lens would be, around the same sort of focal length as it will be my all-encompassing walk-about lens.

I look forward to your help and advice

All the best

Ian

What's your budget? The Canon 17-55 2.8 IS is an one option for an upgrade of the same focal length.

Tamron 17-50 2.8
Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC
Canon 17-55 2.8 IS

Didn't mention Sigma cause I feel the Tamron is better. I think the 17-50 non VC is the way to go unless you need stabilization. I also feel the difference in quality between the 17-50 and 17-55 is too minimal to warrant the price difference (unless you need stabilization at that focal range). I would use the money saved towards a nice flash.

Just look at the lens archive and compare lens images in the range you are looking for.

Cheers guys.

I could possibly stretch to about £500.00, maybe I can get a good second-hand one for that money

I have compared the Sigma 18-50 macro to the Tamron 17-50, and they are very, very close in performance, with the edge on build quality going to the Sigma. Plus the Sigma is usually a bit cheaper (around 10%) in the used market over the Tamron.

Thanks TeamSpeed... I notice in your camera.lens collection, that you ave the Canon 15-55 2.8 IS...

Had you done any comaprisons between that lens and the Sigma or Tamron.

I'm assuming by owning the Canon one, that's your preference?

tuttifrutti wrote in post #10439255
Thanks TeamSpeed... I notice in your camera.lens collection, that you ave the Canon 15-55 2.8 IS...

Had you done any comaprisons between that lens and the Sigma or Tamron.

I'm assuming by owning the Canon one, that's your preference?

I ended up with a very good deal on the 17-55 IS, and yes, I prefer it to the Sigma and Tamron only because of IS and the USM focusing.

tuttifrutti wrote in post #10439092
I feel that I now want to "upgrade" this lens and progress quality-wise.

Image quality or build quality?

There isn't a lot of room to improve on the image quality really - some, certainly, in terms of sharpness wide open and at the extremes of its focal length range, but nothing dramatic.

As for build, well, I think I've read of at most one 18-55 IS that failed in normal use, so the practical scope for improvement isn't great there either.

Where you can improve is in lens features such as maximum aperture, USM, FTM, non-rotation of the front-element, etc, but these are not so much issues of quality, but of specification.

Hi xarqi,

Very good response, thanks very much.

You are totally right in what you say and it's the image quality that I want to improve on.

So, with that in mind it would be a combination of a better quality lens, much improved features built into the lens, especially maximum aperture.

I'm very interested to hear of people's advice as to what to go for. I can't see beyond around the 55mm mark for an everyday lens as then possibly it would be a bit heavier but i'm open to all suggestions

Thanks again all

Probably your ideal lens is the EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS, suggested above.
If your budget won't stretch that far, pick what you want to compromise.

If you can give up IS, consider the Tamron 17-50 (the later VC (=IS) version is considered by many optically inferior), or the Sigma 18-50.

If you can forgo f/2.8, consider the EF-S 15-85 (pricey too), or maybe the Sigma 17-70 OS.

If you can give up both IS and f/2.8, and a bit of length, consider the EF 17-40/4L.

Finally, do give some thought to a judicious selection of primes! The Sigma 30/1.4 and EF 85/1.8 spring to mind.

Thanks again for your reply. Very useful information and help.

If only I could forgo the F/2.8, the 15-85 would be ideal but that is one of the "improvements" I really do feel I need.

Looks like i'm swaying towards the Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS then

rjx wrote in post #10439113
Tamron 17-50 2.8
Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC
Canon 17-55 2.8 IS

That. Tammys only if the limiting factor is your budget... but if you have the money to get a 17-55... you can spend a little bit more for a 24-70 =D

Replaces wrote in post #10440126
That. Tammys only if the limiting factor is your budget... but if you have the money to get a 17-55... you can spend a little bit more for a 24-70 =D

Thanks Replaces...

As stated, the budget can be up to about £500.00 - Just been reading a few bits about the Canon 17-55 nd the build quality is apparently not the greatest for the bucks I would shelll out which is a little dissapointing. Also come across the 24-70 just now too and that's a bit too much for me. The 28-70 would be closer to my price range but then I lose the wide end

Decisions, decisions

The 24-70 is not the best range on a crop body. If tutti likes the 18-55 range, then the replacement lens probably should also be in that range to some extent. There is also the Sigma 17-70 that is a very good lens, but isn't a constant 2.8.

I know it's horses for courses TeamSpeed, but how do you feel about the build quality of your 17-55. Any issues? Have you heard of others with problems - i'm worried that if the quality is a bit plasticy or cheap as some have said, that dust can get in somewhere... are you totally happpy with yours?