Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 30, 2005, 1:18 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1
Default

I am looking at upgrading with a complete Rebel XT package.



Problem is that I have 2x kit options,



Kit 1:

Body + 17 - 85 USM IS $1400

Kit 2:

Body + 28 - 105 USM F3.5 + 100 - 300 USM F4.5 $1100



Well, the 17 - 85 tempts me as even though it is a bit more, maybe I could do with the 17 macro

But, the other deal seems stellar but I am a bit concerned the 28 - 105 may limit my options slightly.

Would I regret the 28 - 105 and 100 - 300 kit? It really does seem to be better value...
speedy si is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 3, 2005, 2:35 PM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1
Default

Hi speedy,

About two months ago I bought my 20D, planning to use the 28-105 and 100-300 I already owned from shooting with an Elan IIe. The first thing I learned was that with the 1.6x crop factor, the 28-105 wouldn't let me zoom back wide enough. Because of the 1.6x, 28mm is the equivalent of 45mm in 35m film terms, and 45mm just isn't wide enough for me. I shoot a lot of landscapes and family events, and I wanted an everyday walk-around lens that could accomodate both. Within a week of buying the 20D, I bought a 17-85 EF-S, and I love it. When I'm shooting a family birthday, it lets me zoom in for a portrait of the birthday boy/girl, and in an instant zoom out to frame a shot of a table full of family members. The IS really works great, too!

Before I bought the 17-85, I considered getting a 17-40L, but I decided it didn't have enogh range to be an every day lens. I didn't want to to be constantly switching lenses during casual shooting because I couldn't zoom in close enough. The 17-85 really fits the bill for me.

When I used the 100-300 on the 20D, I was really disappointed with the results. The pictures were just too soft, especially at the long end. This is with the camera on a tripod, using a remote release and mirror lock-up. After reading some reviews on the internet, I've come to the conclusion the 100-300 just isn't that sharp a lens. I'm currently saving for a 100-400L.
Lucky Forward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 3, 2005, 4:54 PM   #3
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

here is my recommendation..

get kit #1 for sure.. the 17-85 is a very sharp lens and rivals many of the L series lenses as peripatetic has demonstrated for us many times.. also as lucky mentioned it gives you some more working room on the wide angle end..

then save up for a nice telephoto lens in the future.. so use your 17-85 for a few months all the while saving your pennies.. when the time is right, buy a nice telephoto lens that you can use for many years to come.. often it is tempting to buy a cheaper tele in order to cover all your focal ranges right away.. but its really not all that frugal as you will soon "outgrow" it and need to buy a new lens.. so in the long run you will lose money..

come back in a few months and we will show you light.. aka the sigma 70-200 2.8 ex dg hsm and the sigma 100-300 f4.0 ex hsm .. or an L-series if you have lots of extra $$$

best regards, dustin
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 4, 2005, 12:52 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 301
Default

You're comparing an opticallygreat lens (the 17-85) against an opticallysub-average lens (the 28-105). And by the 28-105 I mean the f3.5-4.5 II USM which isat leasta better lens than the cheaper 28-105 f4-5.6 which I wouldn't touch.

I have a copy of the 28-105 f3.5-4.5 II USM and find ittoo soft unless I shoot between f8 and f11. However, in that range I admit it is pretty sharp. I'm afraid though that because of the limited acceptable range I rarely use the thing.

To me the lens is the most important part of your camera equipment. Youwould take much better photos with a 300D and the 17-85 (if you need to save some $) than you ever will with an XT with the 28-105. If you need to go with the XT, then maybe consider going with a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 or the Sigma that is in the same range (and also f2.8 ). Both are optically much better than whatever Canon has in the same price range at that focal length.

If I had a limited budget I would buy the Tamron or Sigma, mainly because they are much faster lenses than the 17-85. For me, f4-5.6 is much too slow ...for others this won't be a problem at all.



Just my $0.02



Bob
BobA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 4, 2005, 11:50 AM   #5
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

i agree.. the tamron 28-75 2.8 and the sigma 24-70 2.8 are great options as well.. i prefer the sigma because the extra 4mm of wide angle of the sigma is much more important than the extra 5mm of tele for the tamron...and i believe it is slightly better optically.. but really they are both great lenses and would serve you equally well..

the thing to keep in mind with these two lenses vs the 17-85 is that they are considerably larger and heavier.. speed always comes at a price..
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:04 AM.