Bought a Canon 40D - good walkaround lens?

[777php]

I just bought my first DSLR, a 40D kit. I plan on selling the 28-135mm lens that comes with the kit and buying one of the following:

Tokina AT-X 535 PRO DX
Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
Sigma 18-200 f3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM

I am looking to buy a walkaround lens which may be the only lens I have for a while until I convince my wife to let me buy more.

I really like the Tokina as it has the f/2.8 that I am really looking for with a reasonable price ($650). The zoom range is nice (50-135mm). It good good reviews on fredmiranda (FM) and photozone.

I also like the Sigma but it got a bad review on photozone but a decent one on FM. The IS is nice to have but it doesn't have the f/2.8 that I would like to have.

As for the canon's, of course I would like to have those but except for the 70-200 I believe those lenses average around $1000 and the zoom on them are somewhat limiting. I'm also worried that its a bit long for a walkaround lens.

The 70-200 has gotten rave reviews all over the web and can be had on ebay for cheap but, the f/4 has me thinking that indoor or lowlight shots might be lacking and I want a lens for all situations.

I would be taking photos of anything and everything, going to Europe in a few months so I would be taking lots of architecture and scenery shots there.

 

[dug777]

You want at least a 17 or 18mm wide-end for a walkaround, imo at least.

Have you considered the Tamron 17-50mm?

I love my 18-135mm Nikkor to bits as an incredibly versatile walkaround...

 

[jpeyton]

Out of the ones you listed, I would get either the 17-55mm or the 24-70mm.

It really depends on your style of photography. For example, for architecture, some people like to get the entire building in the frame, while others like to fill the frame with a particular feature. A little more reach on the telephoto end is also better for portraiture.

One big advantage of the 17-55mm is that it will give you better available light performance because of the built-in IS. Another popular Canon walkaround lens is the 24-105mm f/4L IS; the Tamron dug777 mentioned is a popular option if you're on a budget.

 

[Jawo]

Please read through some of the other threads in this forum...many people have asked a similar question! Also check out the resource thread and read up on lenses at FredMiranda.com, Photozone.de, and DPReview.com.

You will not like a 50-135 for a general purpose lens, for all practical purposes on a crop body it is a short to medium telephoto (80-216mm equivelant). The 28-135 is a great lens....on a full frame body. If you are looking for inexpensive glass, check out EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS. It's only about $200 and great rave reviews. This way you can get the telephoto that pairs nicely (EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 USM II) for ~$450 total. There are many problems inherant to having a wide angle to near telephoto (like the Canon 17-85 IS), some are easy to correct (CA), others aren't (lens softness).

I love my Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 that I have been using for ~8 months. Its not cheap (~$450), but rather sharp, and the constant f/2.8 is really nice in low light.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Jawo
Please read through some of the other threads in this forum...many people have asked a similar question! Also check out the resource thread and read up on lenses at FredMiranda.com, Photozone.de, and DPReview.com.

You will not like a 50-135 for a general purpose lens, for all practical purposes on a crop body it is a short to medium telephoto (80-216mm equivelant). The 28-135 is a great lens....on a full frame body. If you are looking for inexpensive glass, check out EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS. It's only about $200 and great rave reviews. This way you can get the telephoto that pairs nicely (EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 USM II) for ~$450 total. There are many problems inherant to having a wide angle to near telephoto (like the Canon 17-85 IS), some are easy to correct (CA), others aren't (lens softness).

I love my Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 that I have been using for ~8 months. Its not cheap (~$450), but rather sharp, and the constant f/2.8 is really nice in low light.

That 17-85mm gets a beat down at photozone

I find this quite amusing:

The lens broke a new record here - at 17mm it shows the most pronounced barrel distortions of all (supposedly) corrected lenses tested to date and that's by quite a margin. As you may observe in the sample shot below this is not only theory ...

http://www.photozone.de/images...1785_456_is/dist17.jpg

 

[GTaudiophile]

There is a reason that the 17-55 is sold out at most of the big online stores. That is because it is the best walkaround lens for the Canon crop bodies.

The Tamron 17-50 is the next-best compromise.

And Jawo is right about the 18-55 IS plastic fantastic. It's a value that is hard to beat. If you do not need the F2.8 of the 17-55, then buy the 18-55 IS.

Only $175 at B&H.

I owed the 24-105 F4L IS and sold it as 24mm was not wide enough for me on my 20D.

 

[OdiN]

17-85mm EF-S IS

24-105 F4L IS

Those are two good walk arounds. 24 isn't as wide though, but depends on the shooting you're doing.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

What others said.

Tokina AT-X 535 PRO DX
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM

None of these are wide enough.

Sigma 18-200 f3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM

Don't get this. I have this and while the range is useful and the OS is great, the lens just isn't sharp. I have to take it down to f/9 just to get sharpness that is sorta close to what I'm used to with my other lenses. It's great for when you just have to have something light and all-in-one though (which doesn't happen often for me).

 

[rudder]

Another vote for the 24-105L. The 24-70 is an awesome lens as well... but it is a lot heavier.

The tamron 17-50 is an awesome lens for the price as well if you save a little. I have seen copies that rival the canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS. But I have seem some crazy nice shots with the canon lens.. but $400 difference.

 

[777php]

I think for me a f/2.8 is a must have, so I think according to the posts here I should be looking at something with at minimum a 17-18 starting zoom range. Keep in mind that I plan on buying a 50mm f/1.4 prime lens as well.

I'm liking the Tamron lens that Jawo recommended.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: 777php
I'm liking the Tamron lens that Jawo recommended.

dug777 actually mentioned it first, but yes, that's a great lens. Buy from somewhere with a good return policy, on the off-chance that you get a copy that isn't sharp.

 

[The Stigenator]

How about a Sigma 18-125.. seems reasonably sharp if you can find the lens.

 

[alfa147x]

how much do u want for the 28-135 IS ?

 

[jamesbond007]

I personally find the 24-70f/2.8L to be wide enough for my tastes; at least for the situations where I have the room to foot-zoom out. It's impeccably sharp, very fast to focus, and the colors and bokeh are amazing.

I love my lenses to be very fast, so anything slower than f/2.8 will never be found in my bag. I enjoy playing with depth of field, so I may also recommend the purchase of the Canon 85 f/1.8 and/or the Canon 50 f/1.4 and Canon 35 f/2.0. Prime lenses (lenses that do not zoom) tend to offer a very light solution that excel primarily in color, contrast, and image sharpness. Some lenses, such as the 85 f/1.8 will feature Canon's USM or Ultrasonic Motor, which can focus on your subject very quickly. This is ideal for sports photography or snapping photos of your little ones who move very fast.

Though many will say that a prime lens is not a very good walk-around lens, it all comes down to your shooting style. If you're not sure of your style just yet, the 50 f/1.8 can be had for under $100 and give you a nice lens that will focus somewhat slowly, but offer you the aperture and clarity that is somewhat close to Canon's legendary L series lenses.

As you may have noticed, I'm huge on Canon and will be hard pressed to recommend anything but that brand. With the exception of a few Tokina or Sigma specialty lenses, I'm a Canon man.

~Travis

 

[corkyg]

All good suggestions. As was mentioned, your photography obnjectives and principle use are important factors. For years, I used this lens as my "walk around" for Canon D60 and 20D -

XR

When I moved up to the 5D full frame, the 24-105mm f/4 L IS became the workhorse, backed up by an old favorite - a 50mm f/1.4 prime.

I gave the 20D to my daughter-in-law in San Jose, CA. She works as a free lance photog and write for the Almaden Valley News, and continues to use the Tamron 17-55 XR DI as her walk around lens. It is light, compact, sharp, and easy to use. The center release lens cap is better than Canon edge releases for convenience and security - especially with a hood on.

 

[GoingUp]

I have the 17-55mm F2.8 IS and its a great lens!