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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 1, 2010, 3:12 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1
Default Please help choose walk-around lens

I am purchasing a T2i and will get the kit lens because it is so affordable, but would like to upgrade to one walk around lens with more reach. I will be taking video clips of my fast moving grandson and will also take people photos at events and some landscape shots. I live in the Alaskan coastal rainforest, so low light is frequently a problem, especially with indoor shots.

I would really appreciate some advice from people more advanced than me about a better lens, which external flash to buy, etc.

Thank you so much in advance for taking the time to educate me a little on my options!
lindentreenorth is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 1, 2010, 5:35 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

The Canon 15-85 is an excellent lens, with more zoom range than the kit lens.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 1, 2010, 5:38 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

if you do not need as much wide angle the ef 28-135mm is a very good lens also, and it is not to expensive.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 1, 2010, 5:50 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
algold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Israel
Posts: 369
Default

you are getting a kit zoom anyway, which is pretty good, take some time and play with it to understand for yourself whether you need a longer lens, a wider lens or a better faster (aperture wise) lens and go from there. It's too easy to spend someone else's money on the net
As for the flash - a 430ex does a very good job and is comparatively compact, but reasonably powerful. If you want to save some money - Metz 48 AF-1 is just as good and about $80 cheaper:
http://www.metzflash.co.uk/pages/metz48af1.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._AF_1_TTL.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...dlite_TTL.html
algold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 1, 2010, 5:55 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

If you want to save even more on a flash look at the nissin di622. It is a very good flash for the canon as well
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 3, 2010, 2:25 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
a-beginner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 197
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
The Canon 15-85 is an excellent lens, with more zoom range than the kit lens.
I'd go with this as well. It gets very good reviews. But if it is a bit pricey, you can check out the new Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4. It has low light at 17f2.8 and the f4 at max zoom is not too bad either.

There is also the very affordable Sigma 18-125 OS that, with an external flash, gives you a good wide end at 18mm and a nice reach at 125mm. This lens has a fairly decent review. Check out www.lenstip.com.
a-beginner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 3, 2010, 5:07 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Given the quality of the unstabilized Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5, I had high hopes for the stabilized 17-70/2.8-4.0, but it didn't turn out that way. It's not very good.

And the closing remark that PhotoZone.de has about the Sigma 18-125 OS is "All-in-all a sound package when taking the competitive pricing into account." To me, that sounds like "Not bad, considering it's cheap." That's not something I'd go out of my way to buy.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 10, 2010, 5:42 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
pj1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,914
Default

I can vouch for the 15-85 being a great lens, and very handy zoom range. It stays on my 7D most of the time, and I've also used it on my 350D.

Having said that, I had the 18-55mm kit lens on my 350D and complemented it with the 28-135mm lens for several years. That worked very well for me, e.g. for action / sports I preferred the 28-135mm (USM focusing, greater reach, slightly faster at same focal length).

Ok, 28-135mm isn't L quality and not very bright, but still a good performer in my opinion. If you have low light issues as you suggest, you really need a very good and expensive lens for sports / moving objects, or a tripod for landscapes. I found the 18mm of the kit lens handy for when I needed wider landscape shots. (I now also own the Sigma 10-20mm... but that's another story!)

Having said that - if you really want just one lens - and if I were in your shoes, I'd go with the 15-85mm, which also has USM (fast focussing) - but again, it's not going to help 'freeze action' in low light (barely nothing will). The IS (image stabilisation) of the 15-85mm helps for landscapes, still shots, etc - definitely more effective than the 28-135mm's IS.

Hope this helps too

Paul
pj1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 13, 2010, 3:25 AM   #9
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Another recommendation for the 15-85.

And in fact you may be able to find it in a bundle with the camera, there is no point at all in having the standard kit lens if you are getting the 15-85.

As to the 28-135 - well it certainly has its devotees, but I never liked it and know other people who have been totally underwhelmed with its performance and handling. And it's the wrong focal length on a crop camera to boot!
__________________
My gallery
My X100 blog

Last edited by peripatetic; Aug 13, 2010 at 3:27 AM.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 20, 2010, 7:38 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
JustinThyme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 361
Default

While I cant vouch for the 15-85 I can say that I avoid buying EF-S glass. If you ever decide to leave the 1.6x crop body you will have to buy new glass. The EF series works on all of them. Some complain about L glass because of its cost and will insinuate that a less expensive model is better but if you buy used and retain the condition as close to new as possible you can normally sell and get your money back, like a free rental. Sometimes even turn a profit as the used market follows the retail market. If I were in your shoes I would invest in the 24-70 2.8L or 24-105 4L IS . Personally I find the image quality of the 24-70 to be sharper and have more contrast. If you are really into photograhy and want your images to stand out then you need to invest in top notch glass. If you are mostly just photographing for memories and snapshots and dont really want to invest then I would suggest a much less expensive P&S alternative.
JustinThyme 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 4:03 AM.