17-55/24-105 too heavy

I'm looking to upgrade my 28-105II but the 17-55 I got last week is too heavy and my hands are killing me right now. The 15-85 and 24-105 seem to weigh about the same. I'd prefer something in the same range, 40 on the 17-40 isn't long enough to use as my walk around.

The 28-105 works great, but in tricky lighting I'm struggling to get the exposure good. With the 30D I seemed to have less problems but since upgrading for some reason I'm having trouble. It seems better with the 17-55, but again with the weight I just can't do it.

I would go with primes but the Ls are almost as heavy, and I already have 28, 50 and 100. So upgrading to better primes isn't really an option.

Any ideas?

Well, you can try the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (non-VC), but 24-105 is not heavy at all. I mean, I'm used to carrying 24-70 "brick" with me all the time, so I guess I'm bias. But you won't find a light-weight lens in this category.
If weight is an option, there's always point&shoot camera available. But I'd say concentrate on the IQ vs weight.

tamron 17-50mm?...looks to weigh in at about a third less than the 17-55mm

Just to rule out improper camera technique, are you holding the camera by the lens with your left hand? You should be supporting the bulk of the weight with your left hand. I have no idea of your physical ability, but that is not a very heavy lens (1.4lbs) and should be easy to adapt to.

I'm thinking of the tamron, but I worry 50 isn't long enough for me. When shooting on the street I tend to be at 80 or longer a lot.


Yeah I used to think the weight wasn't bad. Aside from the 100 macro I had to sell my longer lenses. I'm trying the 70-200 right now and love it, but again I don't think I can keep it. It's too heavy and the IS isn't helping me keep steady enough to get a decent shot. Even at 1/800 I'm too wobbly!!!

And it's not lack of strength, or age (I'm not even 35 yet) or my being a wimp. I'd deal with it if it was. I have a somewhat rare arthritis. It's scaring me that I don't have much longer before I have to go to a p&s for everything and ditch the DSLR. I guess with these two lenses I was hoping for another year or two with great lenses that I could have fun with and ignore the weight. I guess I'm wrong.

tkbslc wrote in post #11672677
Just to rule out improper camera technique, are you holding the camera by the lens with your left hand? You should be supporting the bulk of the weight with your left hand. I have no idea of your physical ability, but that is not a very heavy lens (1.4lbs) and should be easy to adapt to.

Yeah I always hold with the left, elbows in and close to my chest to keep steady. But see my post above.

gardengirl13 wrote in post #11672684
And it's not lack of strength, or age (I'm not even 35 yet) or my being a wimp. I'd deal with it if it was. I have a somewhat rare arthritis.

I am sorry to hear that. Have you considered moving to prime lenses, which tend to be lighter? A Canon 28mm f1.8 and 85mm f1.8 combo would replace the range you have been using. Although it would require more lens changes, the lenses would be much lighter on camera.

I carry my 7d with a 17-55mm and a 580ex II mounted for hours.

I handed it to a lady at a family event so I could be included in the picture. I thought she was going to drop it. She immediately complained about how heavy it was.

I know Canon tries to accomidate many photographer's needs, but making light-weight lenses that are fast Zooms. Afraid not.

One thing you might try is a monopod. I have used those at all day shoots and it really helps a lot.

I am not sure how much cost is an issue, but a fiend had arthritis to the point where they could not shoot with a DSLR. They bought a Leica M9 and some lenses and are still shooting. Just a thought.

I agree about the primes ( you have to try a 24-70 if you want heavy ) A nice combo of good primes is 28 1.8, 50 1.4 and 85 1.8. All are small and light, use the same size filter and offer really high quality that will surpass any zoom.

why not get a monopod, or at least before ditching the SLR entirely?...are you sure it's camera shake that's causing 1/800 shots to be out of focus?

EF-S 18-135IS?...looks to weigh about the same as the tamron
or even more reach, and lighter EF-S 55-250IS...but you'll need decent light

looks like she already has primes, 28-50-100...

rklepper wrote in post #11672730
I am not sure how much cost is an issue, but a fiend had arthritis to the point where they could not shoot with a DSLR. They bought a Leica M9 and some lenses and are still shooting. Just a thought.

I was also going to suggest something like Olympus m4/3 or Samsung NX, which is much more realistic budget wise for most of us.

Go hit the gym!

have you thought about switching out the 30D for a rebel?

edit:...actually you had a 30D...not sure what you upgraded to

i'm guessing 50D looking at your pbase...
a 50D weighs in at 730g..while a T1i weighs in at ~480g

rklepper wrote in post #11672730
I am not sure how much cost is an issue, but a fiend had arthritis to the point where they could not shoot with a DSLR. They bought a Leica M9 and some lenses and are still shooting. Just a thought.

Oh only if I could!!!


Right now I have the G11 and like it quite a bit. The s90 I looked at was too small and it was harder to hold then the extra weight of the G11. So small sizes aren't good either.

I was thinking of 3/4 cameras and lenses, but I'm still not 100% sold on them yet. I may have to do more research.