Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Lens Suggestion for Canon

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 1:48:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I'm looking for a good walk around lens for a 350XT. The kit lens is a
borderline throw away, and the Canon 17-85 is expensive for such a slow
lens. Also, I'd prefer not to buy digital only lenses, because I hope that
Canon will eventually come out with prosumer level sensors that are full
35mm size...

Suggestions? My 2nd lens will be the L series F 4.0 70-200 zoom.

Thanks in advance...

KB

More about : lens suggestion canon

Anonymous
March 28, 2005 1:48:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Y7qdnbwD7oIW7drfRVn-1A@comcast.com...
> I'm looking for a good walk around lens for a 350XT. The kit lens is a
> borderline throw away, and the Canon 17-85 is expensive for such a slow
> lens. Also, I'd prefer not to buy digital only lenses, because I hope
> that Canon will eventually come out with prosumer level sensors that are
> full 35mm size...
>
> Suggestions? My 2nd lens will be the L series F 4.0 70-200 zoom.
>
> Thanks in advance...
>
> KB
>

I just bought a 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 USM IS lens and love it.....IS is nice
for a walk around lens..Shooting with a 20D

Tim
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 1:48:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Y7qdnbwD7oIW7drfRVn-1A@comcast.com...
> I'm looking for a good walk around lens for a 350XT. The kit lens is a
> borderline throw away, and the Canon 17-85 is expensive for such a slow
> lens. Also, I'd prefer not to buy digital only lenses, because I hope
that
> Canon will eventually come out with prosumer level sensors that are full
> 35mm size...
>
> Suggestions? My 2nd lens will be the L series F 4.0 70-200 zoom.
>
> Thanks in advance...
>

I like the EF 35mm f/2 as a walk around lens.

Greg
Related resources
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 2:05:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Tim S." <hjk@cox.com> wrote in message news:NkK1e.525$ZV5.10@fed1read05...
>
> "Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:Y7qdnbwD7oIW7drfRVn-1A@comcast.com...
>> I'm looking for a good walk around lens for a 350XT. The kit lens is a
>> borderline throw away, and the Canon 17-85 is expensive for such a slow
>> lens. Also, I'd prefer not to buy digital only lenses, because I hope
>> that Canon will eventually come out with prosumer level sensors that are
>> full 35mm size...
>>
>> Suggestions? My 2nd lens will be the L series F 4.0 70-200 zoom.
>>
>> Thanks in advance...
>>
>> KB
>>
>
> I just bought a 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 USM IS lens and love it.....IS is nice
> for a walk around lens..Shooting with a 20D
>
> Tim

Everything is a compromise, but I want something that goes to ~28mm
equivalent on the wide side. I'd also like something that is faster than
f/5.6 on the long end... Of course, the lens I want would have excellent
optical quality, fast and silent focusing, and would come as a throw in with
a box of Cracker-Jack ;-).

KB
March 28, 2005 2:25:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Kyle Boatright wrote:

> "Tim S." <hjk@cox.com> wrote in message news:NkK1e.525$ZV5.10@fed1read05...
>
>>"Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>news:Y7qdnbwD7oIW7drfRVn-1A@comcast.com...
>>
>>>I'm looking for a good walk around lens for a 350XT. The kit lens is a
>>>borderline throw away, and the Canon 17-85 is expensive for such a slow
>>>lens. Also, I'd prefer not to buy digital only lenses, because I hope
>>>that Canon will eventually come out with prosumer level sensors that are
>>>full 35mm size...
>>>
>>>Suggestions? My 2nd lens will be the L series F 4.0 70-200 zoom.
>>>
>>>Thanks in advance...
>>>
>>>KB
>>>
>>
>>I just bought a 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 USM IS lens and love it.....IS is nice
>>for a walk around lens..Shooting with a 20D
>>
>>Tim
>
>
> Everything is a compromise, but I want something that goes to ~28mm
> equivalent on the wide side. I'd also like something that is faster than
> f/5.6 on the long end... Of course, the lens I want would have excellent
> optical quality, fast and silent focusing


The fast 35mm suggested below should provide the best autofocus
(focusing happens at wide aperture before the shot is taken) and be a
normal crop frame lens serving the walkaround purpose with excellent
quality.
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 7:23:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:48:48 -0500, Kyle Boatright
<kboatright1@comcast.net> wrote:
> I'm looking for a good walk around lens for a 350XT. [...]
>
> Suggestions?

I expect everyone will suggest zooms, all of which will be either
pricey or somehow less than ideal optically or in build quality;
so to be contrary, I will suggest the Canon 28mm f/1.8.

I'm not just being perverse, though: that's the walking-around lens
I bought to replace the 18-55mm kit lens, and I've been very happy
with it. I almost never use anything else.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 3:45:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Kyle Boatright wrote:
> I'm looking for a good walk around lens for a 350XT. The kit lens is
a
> borderline throw away, and the Canon 17-85 is expensive for such a
slow
> lens. Also, I'd prefer not to buy digital only lenses, because I
hope that
> Canon will eventually come out with prosumer level sensors that are
full
> 35mm size...
>
> Suggestions? My 2nd lens will be the L series F 4.0 70-200 zoom.

I bought a Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5. The AF is noisy and the lens hunts
a bit in low light but I think its a good compromise given its nice
contrast and colour. The Canon 28-135mm must be nice but I was looking
at replacing the kit lens which is 18mm wide so I didn't want a 28mm
and 24mm looked like a decent compromise. At the other end, the 135mm
reach is nice.

I think Canon and other EOS lens manufacturers owe the consumers a
18-75+ with a constant f/2.8 aperture.

- Siddhartha
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 6:19:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Robert wrote:
> I have been trawling the lens review sites - particularly
> fredmiranda.com and photozone.de and the dpreview lens fora and as
the
> result have a Tamron 28-75 on order. The consensus of opinion on
this
> lens seems to be that it is optically in the same league as the Canon

> 24-70 but about a third of the price. Obviously there is a trade off
in
> build quality - the Canon is built like a tank, but the Tamron has a
> considerable weight advantage of 510 grams against 950 grams if you
are
> concerned about such things.

Did you research/compare the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 with the Tamron
28-75mm? Or the Sigma 28-70mm?

I want a buy a a 24/28-70/75mm f/2.8 for my Maxxum 5.

Thanks,

Siddhartha
March 29, 2005 2:49:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <Y7qdnbwD7oIW7drfRVn-1A@comcast.com>, Kyle Boatright
<kboatright1@comcast.net> writes
>I'm looking for a good walk around lens for a 350XT. The kit lens is a
>borderline throw away, and the Canon 17-85 is expensive for such a slow
>lens. Also, I'd prefer not to buy digital only lenses, because I hope that
>Canon will eventually come out with prosumer level sensors that are full
>35mm size...
>
>Suggestions? My 2nd lens will be the L series F 4.0 70-200 zoom.
>
>Thanks in advance...
>
>KB

I have been trawling the lens review sites - particularly
fredmiranda.com and photozone.de and the dpreview lens fora and as the
result have a Tamron 28-75 on order. The consensus of opinion on this
lens seems to be that it is optically in the same league as the Canon
24-70 but about a third of the price. Obviously there is a trade off in
build quality - the Canon is built like a tank, but the Tamron has a
considerable weight advantage of 510 grams against 950 grams if you are
concerned about such things.
--
Robert
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 7:00:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I've been very satisfied with the Canon 28-135 IS lens.

Steve
"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1112082331.225223.63280@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Kyle Boatright wrote:
>> I'm looking for a good walk around lens for a 350XT. The kit lens is
> a
>> borderline throw away, and the Canon 17-85 is expensive for such a
> slow
>> lens. Also, I'd prefer not to buy digital only lenses, because I
> hope that
>> Canon will eventually come out with prosumer level sensors that are
> full
>> 35mm size...
>>
>> Suggestions? My 2nd lens will be the L series F 4.0 70-200 zoom.
>
> I bought a Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5. The AF is noisy and the lens hunts
> a bit in low light but I think its a good compromise given its nice
> contrast and colour. The Canon 28-135mm must be nice but I was looking
> at replacing the kit lens which is 18mm wide so I didn't want a 28mm
> and 24mm looked like a decent compromise. At the other end, the 135mm
> reach is nice.
>
> I think Canon and other EOS lens manufacturers owe the consumers a
> 18-75+ with a constant f/2.8 aperture.
>
> - Siddhartha
>
March 30, 2005 1:38:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <1112091565.165684.32260@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
Siddhartha Jain <losttoy@gmail.com> writes
>Robert wrote:
>> I have been trawling the lens review sites - particularly
>> fredmiranda.com and photozone.de and the dpreview lens fora and as
>the
>> result have a Tamron 28-75 on order. The consensus of opinion on
>this
>> lens seems to be that it is optically in the same league as the Canon
>
>> 24-70 but about a third of the price. Obviously there is a trade off
>in
>> build quality - the Canon is built like a tank, but the Tamron has a
>> considerable weight advantage of 510 grams against 950 grams if you
>are
>> concerned about such things.
>
>Did you research/compare the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 with the Tamron
>28-75mm? Or the Sigma 28-70mm?
>
>I want a buy a a 24/28-70/75mm f/2.8 for my Maxxum 5.
>

The Sigma 24-70 f2.8 and 28-70 f2.8 user reports that I have read are
good but not quite as good as the Tamron.
--
Robert
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 4:12:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 23:57:34 +0200, Lourens Smak <smak@wanadoo.nl> wrote:
>
> So, Sigma is your best bet. They have an 18-50 f/2.8 but I don't think
> it is shipping yet.

I posted about it a few days ago, and Alan Browne pointed out that
its photozone.de ratings are less than inspiring.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 4:12:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Ben Rosengart wrote:

> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 23:57:34 +0200, Lourens Smak <smak@wanadoo.nl> wrote:
>
>>So, Sigma is your best bet. They have an 18-50 f/2.8 but I don't think
>>it is shipping yet.
>
>
> I posted about it a few days ago, and Alan Browne pointed out that
> its photozone.de ratings are less than inspiring.

You posted the data, I just interpreted the data to be poor for my
purposes. You noted the slow AF as being bad for you, I noted wide open
performance as being bad for me.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 5:09:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:02:49 -0500, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> Ben Rosengart wrote:
>
>> I posted about it a few days ago, and Alan Browne pointed out that
>> its photozone.de ratings are less than inspiring.
>
> You posted the data, I just interpreted the data to be poor for my
> purposes. You noted the slow AF as being bad for you, I noted wide open
> performance as being bad for me.

All true. You also noted that with cognitive dissonance driving up
lens ratings, the mediocre rating of this lens ought to be interpreted
through, um, what are the opposite of rose-colored glasses? Aquamarine
glasses? Anyway, I thought it was a good point, and it helped me
scratch this lens off my list.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 5:09:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Ben Rosengart wrote:


> All true. You also noted that with cognitive dissonance driving up
> lens ratings, the mediocre rating of this lens ought to be interpreted
> through, um, what are the opposite of rose-colored glasses? Aquamarine
> glasses? Anyway, I thought it was a good point, and it helped me
> scratch this lens off my list.

Too bad. I mean for all of us. It would be great if there were two 3rd
party lens makers that could consistently make great lenses across the
line and keep the OEM's in price check.

As to the ratings at photozone there is another section which summarizes
the ratings by various (unnamed to protect the guilty) magazines. A
narrower composite of presumably more reliable raters.

Back to the user ratings ... one could assume a lighter weighting to
raters of lower value lenses with a very low number of imputs and give
it more weight as the number of inputs rose above, say, 30 inputs.

On higher performance glass (like the const. aperture fast zoom in
question), one could asssume that the raters are more knowledgeable and
give their ratings more weight even at a lower number of inputs.

So the lens in question shouldn't be derated any further as it is aimed
at a more knowledgeable photographer. That's actually what I think has
happened with this particular rating on p-zone.

It used to be that we could go to photodo for a cross check on sharpness
and distotion but they seem to have stopped doing new ratings about 2
years ago.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 5:33:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:24:01 -0500, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
> As to the ratings at photozone there is another section which summarizes
> the ratings by various (unnamed to protect the guilty) magazines.

How do I find that? I'd ask for a link, but my experience with deep
links into photozone.de is that they don't always work. Thanks in
advance.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 5:33:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Ben Rosengart wrote:

> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:24:01 -0500, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>>As to the ratings at photozone there is another section which summarizes
>>the ratings by various (unnamed to protect the guilty) magazines.
>
>
> How do I find that? I'd ask for a link, but my experience with deep
> links into photozone.de is that they don't always work. Thanks in
> advance.

Yes, it's a pain.

Start at the home page.

Look on the extreme right, halfway down for "updated Lens Test Guide"

Cheers,
Alan
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 7:43:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 22:16:40 -0500, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
> Start at the home page.
>
> Look on the extreme right, halfway down for "updated Lens Test Guide"

Thanks. BTW, in this case, deep linking does appear to work. The
URL is <http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm&gt; .

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
Anonymous
April 6, 2005 10:28:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 03:43:24 +0000 (UTC), Ben Rosengart <br+rpdss@panix.com>
wrote:
>
> Thanks. BTW, in this case, deep linking does appear to work. The
> URL is <http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm&gt; .

Or it was, anyway. It's gone, as far as I can tell, except in
Google's cache.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
!