Camera Labs

Hi Gordon,

Can you or somebody on this forum help me with standart zoom lens for Canon 30D.

Which one will be the best IQ (sharp) lens.

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM IS
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 USM L IS
Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC Macro HSM

As a tele lens I want to buy Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 USM L IS

I read both reviews but 17-55 2.8 IS confused me little bit. Because on another webpages is quit sharp.

http://www.www.photozone.de/8Reviews/le ... /index.htm

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Revi ... eview.aspx

Thank You for your help.

Hi Melky,

A warm welcome to the CameraLabs forum.

I am sure you have already checked out Gordon's reviews. If not then the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM IS is here and the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 USM L IS is here. Both reviews include Video Tours.

For the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM IS also have a look at the SLRGear Review which directly compares this lens with a number of others.

As you can see from my signature I use the 24-105 which is ideal as my walk-around lens. Depending on your needs you may not find that 24mm (39mm equivalent on a full frame camera) gives a wide enough view. I unreservedly recommend the EF 70-200mm f/4 USM L IS which I also own.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

Hi Melky, in addition to what Bob's said, I'd say the 24-105mm is the best performing of the three, but it doesn't get that wide AND it's 'only' f4.0. If you want wide angle AND fast aperture, then the 17-55mm f2.8 is the one you should get. I've not tested the Sigma.

PS - you may also find our Canon kit lens group test interesting here:

http://www.cameralabs.com/features/Cano ... s_upgrade/

My question was more about IQ (sharpness). Are they same? Which is beter. I know about angles,fast aparture, zoom range, built quality - which is better on L lenses.

Because on the test looks for me nearly same resoults from 18-55 vs. 17-55(which is cheap standart).

I know adventage of IS, fast aparture. But if the IQ is not good is waisting money. Like Nikon DSLR D200 great body but IQ worst like 30D ISO 400 and high(more noisy and noise reduction causes lost of details).

On the another web-tests looks like a sharp lens but here isn`t.

for example SLR Gear:
This lens is decently sharp wide open, and wonderfully sharp at f/4, across its entire focal length range.

Only think why i looking for aparture 2.8 is that sometimes you need more light (no tripod, cant use flash)and the another one, Aparture 2,8 on 40D enable (Center point additionally sensitive with lenses of F2..

If the optical quality better on 24-105 I`ll be only happy, wide zoom nearly like on compact cameras and tele is little bit longer about 168. Much more sealed and have got better build quality.

My last question is about image sharpnes on 30D and 40D. 30D was pretty sharp (JPEG) in the test like 5D(if not better) but smaler pictures because 8Mpix vs. 12.

But 40D looks more blured straight from camera (JPEG). Is because they use noise reduction (more pixels more noise) or just dont use same level of sharpness.

Thank U

And sorry about my english