17-55/24-105 too heavy

supernova74 wrote in post #11675774
i dont find the 17-55 heavy at all.

so what are you offering to carry around the lens for the o.p. while she just looks thru the viewfinder, and hits the shutter?

ceegee wrote in post #11673805
I have arthritis, so camera/lens weight is always a factor for me. I use a Tamron 28-75 f2.8, and am very satisfied with it. It's nice and light, and gives great IQ. The constant f2.8 is very useful as well. If you can live with 28 mm, it might be an option.

How do you find the 55-250 to work? I'm assuming the weight is good for you?

phreeky wrote in post #11674648
The Tamron options like the 17-50 and 28-75 are small and light in comparison to the Canon lenses.

If your condition doesn't rule out focusing manually there are old primes (i.e. 135mm F/2.8) that can be adapted to fit that are EXTREMELY small and light. I hve such a lens and it's hardly bigger than the 18-55 kit lens, and not overly heavy at all, hardly feels like a lens is attached. And the manual focus action is smoooooth, so it's not as hard as you think.

Yeah i have to say I'm really missing my A1 and very light VERY sharp primes! I loved those days and how small my kit could be.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #11674852
What about a 60D and a hand strap? The 60D is lighter, very close to the 30D weight, and the swivel LCD may allow you to hold the camera in a more comfortable position while using the screen tilted to give you the live view. Also a $10 hand strap will help distribute the overall weight more evenly around your hand and allow you to relax your fingers. Finally, adding a carbon fiber monopod to help support the camera in between shooting could help rest your hand as well, plus add stability in lower light situations.

http://www.dealextreme​.com/details.dx/sku.81​75

Finally, I agree looking into the 55-250 or maybe primes as have been suggested. The 50 1.4 Canon is very light, as an example. The Tamron 17-50 as suggested is a good lens, and the Sigma 18-50 macro is about the same size and is a bit cheaper too.

Great that you are looking at options than get out of the hobby. That would just kill me to have to sell everything and revert to a good point and shoot or a different format.

Hmmm I may have to go to the city soon to look through all these cameras. Maybe the 60D would be better for me??

And that strap looks promising! All the others I've looked at require the grip and this one doesn't.

JeffreyG wrote in post #11675169
My father has anklyosing spondilitis which as a similar track to what the OP has described. It steadilty takes away stength and mobility.

Body - Drop down to a Rebel. You might consider a micro 4:3. I have a GF-1 and with the 20/1.7 it has excellent IQ. The 14-45 zoom is good, but it solves nothing for you in regards to a faster lens than the 28-105 you have. And the available primes for micro 4:3 are spotty so far.

Lenses - as was mentioned, perhaps a handful of the small and light Canon primes might work (28/1.8, 35/2, 50/1.4 and 85/1.8. Another look would be third party zooms. A lot of Sigma and Tamron zooms are a lot smaller and lighter than Canon versions.

This is exactly what I have. The inflammation gets attacked by my immune system which in turn can cause a calcification and you form bone where joints should be. Then once that happens you can't move that joint. It becomes fused.

I have the 28 1.8, 50 1.8 and 100 macro (which I may switch for the lighter 60 macro since that is getting too heavy too.) I just like the working distance of the 100.

Tony_Stark wrote in post #11675420
Have you tried the 24-70L?

gardengirl13 wrote in post #11677939
How do you find the 55-250 to work? I'm assuming the weight is good for you?

It's a great little lens - it's produced some of my favourite action shots and portraits, and I'd recommend it without hesitation. The IS is very effective; with arthritis, and I'd guess with your condition too, camera shake can be a problem. But not with this lens.

You mention swapping out your 100 macro for a 60. I have the 60, and love it. It's just about the perfect lens on a crop camera. On some outings, it's the only one I take - it can easily serve as a general "walkaround" lens as well as for close-ups/macros.

Samples from the 55-250...

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

If weight is a serious consideration, why not just get the 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS lens? Your Pbase looks like primarily outdoor natural light shots, where not having f/2.8 is a non issue. I bought a 17-55, but mostly to get the better manual focus and zoom rings so I can use it for video, not because my 18-55 IS was lacking for optical performance. The 18-55 IS is cheaply built for sure, and using a polarizer is a PITA with it, but it is noticeably better than my 28-105 USM II, optically.

Getting a T2i body, even as a secondary, also seems like a good tradeoff--you lose some high end features, but your image quality isn't going to suffer.

Nice shots!! i love her eyes!! Very cool!

I just ordered the 55-250 from adorama. I really hate to have to return the 70-200, but it's just too much for my hands, I'm also excited about the extra 50mm on the long end!!

I wanted something to make my images pop a bit more then the 28-105, that was the reason for the upgrade. But I guess I'm just going to deal with it since the weight is something I'm used to. I may look into the 18-55 IS though if it's a bit lighter.

I also am thinking more about the 60 macro too.


Thanks everyone for you help!!!

55-250 is a great lens.

It has its weaknesses sure but image quality isnt one of them. Its amazingly light as well. I used to use it all the time until i got the 70-200. Image quality wasnt my reason to upgrade

some samples from early last year.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/awignall/445210​1840/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/awignall/445132​5181/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/awignall/444300​4617/

gardengirl13 wrote in post #11672574
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?

That's a shame, but I understand not everyone has the same strength in their hands and wrists. I shoot with the 24-70L which is one of the heavier walk around zooms, but when balancing the camera in one hand and the lens in the other... I rarely find it to be heavy.

I'd say either look at Tamrons or avoid f/2.8 Zooms. Most f/2.8 Zooms are going to be heavier.

gardengirl13 wrote in post #11678230
I wanted something to make my images pop a bit more then the 28-105, that was the reason for the upgrade. But I guess I'm just going to deal with it since the weight is something I'm used to. I may look into the 18-55 IS though if it's a bit lighter.

I understand. Compared to my newer lenses, my 28-105 does not have "pop", it is optically the worst lens in my current kit, but I've also had it since 1997 so improvements in 11 years are to be expected. The 18-55 is more than "a bit" lighter, it's 200g vs 375g, just over half the weight of the 28-105.

gardengirl13 wrote in post #11678230
I also am thinking more about the 60 macro too.

This lens is in a different league for IQ. It's awesome. The 17-55 is decently sharp, but it doesn't touch the 60/2.8.

gardengirl13 wrote in post #11678230
I just ordered the 55-250 from adorama. I really hate to have to return the 70-200, but it's just too much for my hands, I'm also excited about the extra 50mm on the long end!!

You won't regret it. It's a very nice lens.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

pbelarge wrote in post #11672886
Did you even read the thread? lazy and rude.....

Excuse me for having a sense of humour, I meant no disrespect whatsoever...

That is one odd sense of humor, the person has a debilitating disease that will get worse with time, and that is your attempt at a funny?

hope the lens works out for you.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #11679030
That is one odd sense of humor, the person has a debilitating disease that will get worse with time, and that is your attempt at a funny?

A poor attempt I admit, once again I mean no harm as stated before... I haven't read the post, just now saw it was a female strugling with a disease but frankly that's no excuse for my improper reply which I should have never posted to start with!