Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Mon Oct 20, 2014 1:38 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 6:18 pm 
Hi!
First of all thx to Gordon for the helpfull videos!

I've searched now through a infinite number of sites and pics and i can't decide which is best for me... so plz help me ;)

First of all what do i want?
-> I'm going to a study abroad in Australia and NZ for the next year so my kit lense has to be replaced!
-> I want to do photos of landscapes a lot as well as let's say "everykindphotos" like sports,portraits, closups, animals,... ->a lens for every situation

I found the Canon 17-85 and the Tamron 17-50 recommended a lot...

As said my mainfocus will be landscapes and everyday live (Yes i know more than 1lens would be better, but I'm a student so cash is :cry: )

(When I'm looking at some canon 17-85 shots on flickr or other sides it seems to me that the difference of the standard kit lense isn't that great???)

The more I research to more i get confused

Thx for your help and greetings from austria!


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 7:29 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 4:30 pm
Posts: 9823
Location: UK
Hi Andi,

May I offer you a warm welcome to the CameraLabs forums.

I've moved your post into the Canon forum as it concerns lenses for a Canon (the DSLR Tips forum is rather confusingly devoted to our sister site DSLR Tips).

That site has a nice primer on buying lenses which you can read here. More specifically, I'm sure you have seen Gordon's EF-S 17-85mm f4~5.6 IS USM lens review but have you seen the lens upgrade group test. Another possibility might be the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM which was reviewed here, but it is pricier and not so good if you need really wide-angle coverage.

Don't forget to factor in the current Canon Cashback Promotion which runs until the end of June. :idea:

Bob.

_________________
Olympus OM-D E-M1 + M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8, Lumix 7-14mm f/4, Leica DG Summilux 15mm f/1.7 ASPH, M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8, M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm 1:1.8.
Leica D Vario-Elmar 14mm-150mm f/3.5 - f/5.6 ASPH.
OM-D E-M5, H-PS14042E, Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 9:29 pm 
Andi,
Yours is a common question. I'm waiting for Canon to come out with a lens like Nikon's 18-200mm.

I really think the choices for this situation, from Canon, is rather short. In my case, I like to photograph landscapes so wide angle is absolutely necessary. I haven't invested in the 24 to 105 because 24mm just isn't wide enough. Sharpness is also important to me. For that reason I stayed away from the 17-85mm, even though I've seen some beautiful images from that lens. For you it may be the best solution from Canon.

I tried the Tamron 17-50mm after reading it's generally positive reviews. I found that it wasn't very sharp on my 40D. I eventually settled on the Canon 17-55mm. It is tack sharp and the IS works beautifully. Only negative for travel is it's weight, but I'm willing to put up with that for it's other qualities.

You may also want to look at the Canon 17-40mm. Equally as sharp as the 17-55mm, but without IS. And a little lighter.

In summary, for a student who will be traveling, I think I would opt for the Canon 17-85mm. Fairly light with a really useful focal range.

Hope I haven't confused you even more.
Tom


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 7:03 am 
same problem here tlatone, Canon doesn't have cheap and effective wide angle zoom lens 24 or 28 isn't good enough, 17-85mm has many flaws
and not that cheap either.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 9:09 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 4:30 pm
Posts: 9823
Location: UK
Enche Zein wrote:
same problem here tlatone, Canon doesn't have cheap and effective wide angle zoom lens 24 or 28 isn't good enough, 17-85mm has many flaws
and not that cheap either.

For "cheap and effective" what about the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS which was the lens used for Gordon's EOS 450D / Digital Rebel XSi review? For anther look at this lens check out the PhotoZone review. With a full-frame equivalent focal length of 29mm it's not an "ultra-wide" but it's surely wide enough for most purposes.

Bob.

_________________
Olympus OM-D E-M1 + M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8, Lumix 7-14mm f/4, Leica DG Summilux 15mm f/1.7 ASPH, M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8, M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm 1:1.8.
Leica D Vario-Elmar 14mm-150mm f/3.5 - f/5.6 ASPH.
OM-D E-M5, H-PS14042E, Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 9:37 am 
Thanks guys for your tipps!

Hm I think it's a "nonesens" discussion if canon 17-85 or the tamron 17-55!?


Maybe i should go for two lenses and save some money for a better 2-lens solution?
Do you guys have any ideas or suggestions for this matter?
If there are some pricy lenses in your thoughts maybe i could get some cheaper used ones...


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:46 pm 
Bob has a good point about Canon's new 18-55mm IS. I haven't use it. but read that it's exceptionally good for it's price. It doesn't work for me because I shoot with a circular polarizing filter. If your choice comes down to the Tamron 17-50 or the Canon 18-55, get the Canon. It has IS and is half the cost of the Tamron.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 9:37 pm 
hm the 18-55 would be a good idea but i couldn't use a pol filter ;(

in conclusion tamron got the better quality and canon IS when i compare them? in this terms i would go for the tamron...


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 11:35 pm 
My experience with Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 has been sour
It is good only for low iso (around 400 or less) in 800 or more
the noise are very significant compare to the canon lens.

I bought it because of the good review, and plan to use it to cover
dance/action event, but because it's disadvantage using high iso and
auto focus speed is slower than USM and not as sharp as i expect

I use it only occasilonally now.

but is the Tamron better than kit lens? I will say yes because
it has f2.8 on every focal lenght, ability to create good dof/bokeh
and the most important it is wide.

oh yeah, I heard 18-55 mm IS kit lens is good but i don't like
the 3.5 - 5.6 can this lens produce good dof?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 6:12 pm 
huh ... i found a new considerable alternative to the both, sigma 17-70 any recommendations to this one.

does the IS in the canon objective really makes a considerable improvement to the others?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 3:31 am 
Aut_Andi wrote:
huh ... i found a new considerable alternative to the both, sigma 17-70 any recommendations to this one.

does the IS in the canon objective really makes a considerable improvement to the others?


other than IS, i think optically it is better. but I don't know for sure.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group