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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 20, 2010, 4:37 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 349
Default another new lens question, sry

ok so i have a bit of a dilemma:
current setup: XSi, 50 1.8, 18-55(kit), 70-300 USM

I am going to (most likely) upgrade to the 60D soon (decided that vid is important to me after all)

Now i have read that the kit lens with that thing (18-135) is not the greatest in the world and i believe as kit lens it comes to about $300
On the other hand i am not quite happy with the 18-55, mainly because i would like more reach on my walk-around lens.

so that leaves 28-135, or the 17-85 (within my budget).
i am a bit scared to go with the former due to the APC sensor and maybe getting shorted on the wide side, but on the latter i may be a bit short as well (opposite side)
i do realize with 135 i have a quite a bit of overlap with the 70-300, but its nice not to have carry a lot of gear if i dont have to...

anyway, any opinions are appreciated. thx
__________________
My crappy Flickr

Last edited by ronin2307; Sep 20, 2010 at 6:57 PM.
ronin2307 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 20, 2010, 4:44 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

17-85mm would be good if wide angle is something you use allot, but the 15-85 is the better lens. I use the 28-135 as my walk around. Wide angle is not that important to me. I like that is focus very fast, produce a nice image. Most of my canon shot I post is with the 28-135mm. Also is is pretty inexpensive, you can get it for under 300 new on ebay at times.
__________________
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 Sep 20, 2010, 4:45 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 349
Default

yeah i read about the 15-85 as well, but it is outside of the budget at $700, if i am not mistaken
__________________
My crappy Flickr
ronin2307 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 20, 2010, 4:46 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

It is a bit more pricey, but it is a better lens.
__________________
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 Sep 20, 2010, 6:56 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 349
Default

do sigma or tamron have anything in this range that might be better? I dont know anything worth while about those brands.
__________________
My crappy Flickr
ronin2307 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 20, 2010, 7:13 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

you can look at the sigma 18-125 OS HSM,
__________________
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 Sep 20, 2010, 8:08 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

The Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 is a very good lens, it's relatively inexpensive, but it's not stabilized and the stabilized equivalent isn't as good.
__________________
  • 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 Sep 21, 2010, 2:33 AM   #8
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Check out the charts at slrgear.com.

Stick with the 18-55 until you can upgrade to the 15-85.
__________________
My gallery
My X100 blog
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 21, 2010, 2:47 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
algold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Israel
Posts: 369
Default

if your 18-55 has IS (the newer version) - stick with it, like Peri said, if it's an older non-IS version, 17-85 is a nice lens that you can get new (ex-kit in white box) for about $300. because of the versatile range and IS I use it more than my 17-50/2.8 Tamron. or just save for 15-85, or buy it as a kit with 60D (should be cheaper this way).

Last edited by algold; Sep 22, 2010 at 7:01 PM.
algold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 21, 2010, 8:48 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 349
Default

yeah, my 18-55 is the newer one, as i just started to dabble in photography about 6 months ago and that is when i got it.

looks like i need to stick with what i have and not waste money on so-so upgrades.
thx
__________________
My crappy Flickr
ronin2307 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 11:17 PM.