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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 31, 2005, 8:49 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
mysticalcb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5
Default

buying a 20d to replace my 10d and 2 tamron lenses (19-35 3.5 , 28-300)for landscape,sunsets and gen walkaround single lens.Willl beprinting atA3+ seeking info,comments on these lenses ef-s17-85 is, 16-35 2.8L, 15-30 EX or 17-35 DI seeking the best quality for the $$ any comments or sugg appreacited . Charlie
mysticalcb is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 31, 2005, 10:34 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 544
Default

Charlie...

I have the EF-S 17-85IS on my 20D. It's a great "walk-around" lens. I have printed some very nice 13 X 19 pictures taken with this combination on my Canon i9100. This isn't the least expensive option available, but it works great for me. You'll find a lot of folks who complain about this lens, but most of the complainers don't own it. I can't comment on the others you mentioned in your post.
Wildman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2005, 12:43 AM   #3
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

heard great things about the canon 17-85.. and i am currently considering a purchase of the sigma 17-35 (its fast and i love the build quality)..

also

sigma makes two othernice normal zooms..

24-60 2.8 ex dg

24-70 2.8 ex dg macro

i prefer the build of the 24-70, but they are both excellent, fast (constant f2.8!) lenses...both sell forright around 400 US Dollars..

hope that helps, dustin

Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2005, 2:39 AM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 56
Default

I use the Canon 17-40L as my walkaround lens and for landscapes and sunsets. It's one of the lower priced L lenses and usually gets verygood reviews. I find it to be long enough for landscapes and sunsets with the crop factor.
hkrautter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2005, 6:36 AM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Hards80

FYI - Check over here: http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests


BTW I have the Sigma 17-35 f/2.8 EX as well and took some of the most beautiful pictures with it - just check it's MTF vs the 17-40L and on top of that you gain 1-stop for sunrise/sunset
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2005, 4:37 PM   #6
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

NHL

thats a great link, its nice to have some photos to make a subjective comparison rather than just a chart to go by.. that 24-70 really looks good, but i have the 28-135 canon, so i guess i dont REALLY need one.. hehe

anyways, besides the aforementioned 17-35 i am lookin at.. i am also lookin at 15-30 sigma for somethin a little wider than the canon.. you had any experience with this one, and how does it stack up against the 17-35??

i am also lookin ultrawide kinda, maybe the 10-20 when it comes out, but i am not sure that for my needs i need one...

any opinions would be welcome..

dustin
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2005, 5:25 PM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Hards80 wrote:
Quote:
anyways, besides the aforementioned 17-35 i am lookin at.. i am also lookin at 15-30 sigma for somethin a little wider than the canon.. you had any experience with this one, and how does it stack up against the 17-35??
The Sigma 15-30 is actually a better lens than the 17-35 on a full-frame camera if you want to migrate up later

However only the 'best' part of the 17-35 is used on a cropped digital camera, and this lens has HSM which is not on the 15-30. It's also a stop faster at the wide which is useful in low light especially around seascapes, and why I picked it over the competition...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2005, 6:26 PM   #8
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

the hsm and 2.8 are definately big selling points for me and why it was my first choice.. i was just reading some more favorable reviews on fredmiranda regarding the 15-30.. however with only 7 and 8reviews respectively, i wasnt putting that much stock in it..

i think combining my first choice with some backup from a respected opinion such as yours, i think i will get the 17-35 here when my next paycheck comes..

thanks,dustin
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 3, 2005, 1:04 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
mysticalcb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5
Default

thanks guys I am definitly going with a f2.8 now its just which one ,will give the 17x35 and 18x50(anyone have any experince withthis one) a closer lookI currently use a i9900(which prints beautifuly)but am awaiting a cannon wider format to do larger than A3+
mysticalcb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 3, 2005, 5:01 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 117
Default

mysticalcb wrote:
Quote:
but am awaiting a cannon wider format to do larger than A3+
Can I ask you what you mean by this, I've had some brillaint prints done on A2 and 20x16 from both my 10D and my 20D!

Just curious,
Carl.
CarlsPhotos 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 11:52 AM.