Lens upgrade (Canon)

Mark · 02-02-2010, 23:50

Given the upcoming hols, I'm considering options regarding my 18-55 kit lens and whether it's worth looking at an upgrade. Given my (lack of) serious camera use, I'm reluctant to throw masses of money at the problem however.

My local camera shop suggested the EF-S 17-85 F/4.0-5.6, at £300-ish, which satisfies my needs (mainly giving me a little more wide angle and closing the 55-70 'hole'). I'm not sure what the IQ is like on this lens.

However, I'm rather liking the reviews of the new 15-85. I'd be prepared to hire one (£100), or maybe even buy one out there, use it, bring it home, and then decide which one to sell (obviously I don't need both).

Or of course I could just take the 18-55 and be done with it.

PS - I did consider hiring a 100-400 to get 'that' shot - but it's far from certain I'll pull it iff, and I've spent enough on that particular dream already.

Matblack · 03-02-2010, 00:44

Sigma 17-70

I'm actually considering selling mine, its a cracking lens but I'd like to get some L glass or the 17-55 IS to prepare for taking thousands of photos in the summer.

MB

Mark · 03-02-2010, 01:03

I knew you had a Sigma something but couldn't remember the details.

Haven't found a review yet (but haven't really been looking). Seems like a good lens though and hits the range I want. Loses out on IS but being faster in the first place will compensate - as will improving my camera holding technique.

PS - I've already decided L glass isn't for me. Just can't justify it (lottery win excepted).

SCM · 03-02-2010, 02:56

Only thing with the 17-85mm when i had the Lens was i found it soft focus wise and the shots didn't come out as crisp as they should have. Might just have been my Lens but have heard other people saying the same thing might have changed since then though with newer builds.

Kitten · 03-02-2010, 08:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark

I knew you had a Sigma something but couldn't remember the details.

Haven't found a review yet (but haven't really been looking). Seems like a good lens though and hits the range I want. Loses out on IS but being faster in the first place will compensate - as will improving my camera holding technique.

PS - I've already decided L glass isn't for me. Just can't justify it (lottery win excepted).

Just buy L glass second hand.

Mark · 03-02-2010, 08:40

I've been scanning TP, on both counts, so I've heard other reports of soft focus on the 17-85. Think I'll skip that one given that I'm trying to keep costs under control and I've got enough problems getting things in focus already.

I'll certainly keep an eye on the second-hand market (including L glass), but the price gap being as wide as it is I'm not expecting much.

So, looking like the Sigma or hiring a 15-85 (need to get in touch with Lensesforhire).

Davey_Pitch · 04-02-2010, 11:52

Is the only reason you're upgrading to close that 55-70mm gap you mentioned? The only reason I'm asking is that I found my 18-55mm IS lens to be very sharp, and even though the IQ on the Sigma is excellent from what I've seen, it didn't offer enough improvement to justify the cost of the upgrade. I found my 18-55mm plus the 55-250mm IS offered a great combination of quality, length, and affordability, though I don't know what lenses you have (I think you have the 70-300mm, which from what I've seen isn't quite as good as the 55-250mm IQ wise, though you do get the extra length).

Mark · 05-02-2010, 00:58

IQ wise I think both the 55-250 and the 70-300 are pretty good. My personal view is the 70-300 is better built, but maybe the 55-250 does edge it in IQ (would be nice to find a side-by-side comparison). I got the 70-300 for the extra reach (which I needed when I got it and I'll need again this time). Ironically I've found I could have done with the 55-250 at the shorter end, but what's done is done and I'm not for changing it.

I'll admit I don't like 'the gap' and that does motivate me, but it would also be nice to have a better walkabout lens. I've found that when I do take the camera out, I more often than not just take one lens, and I've made the mistake of just taking the 70-300 before.

Mark · 13-02-2010, 19:23

Abandoned the lens idea for now (I may still hire one, but I won't be buying).

However, I'm considering an HD camcorder instead (shame the 450D doesn't 'do' video as that would have solved the problem). The issue I'm having is whether to risk getting an NTSC one while I'm over there (they can be as much as 1/3rd cheaper than the identical PAL version - mostly due to import duty and VAT).

PS - I've already got a mini-DV camcorder, but I just never play the tapes back. I'd be surprised if the ones I've taken in the past even do play back without snapping now. I'm going all solid-state from now on.

SCM · 13-02-2010, 22:01

Canon just bringing out a camera in the shape of the 550D soon which has a HD video option now.

02-02-2010, 23:50	#1
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	Lens upgrade (Canon) Given the upcoming hols, I'm considering options regarding my 18-55 kit lens and whether it's worth looking at an upgrade. Given my (lack of) serious camera use, I'm reluctant to throw masses of money at the problem however. My local camera shop suggested the EF-S 17-85 F/4.0-5.6, at £300-ish, which satisfies my needs (mainly giving me a little more wide angle and closing the 55-70 'hole'). I'm not sure what the IQ is like on this lens. However, I'm rather liking the reviews of the new 15-85. I'd be prepared to hire one (£100), or maybe even buy one out there, use it, bring it home, and then decide which one to sell (obviously I don't need both). Or of course I could just take the 18-55 and be done with it. PS - I did consider hiring a 100-400 to get 'that' shot - but it's far from certain I'll pull it iff, and I've spent enough on that particular dream already. Last edited by Mark; 02-02-2010 at 23:52.

03-02-2010, 00:44	#2
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	Sigma 17-70 I'm actually considering selling mine, its a cracking lens but I'd like to get some L glass or the 17-55 IS to prepare for taking thousands of photos in the summer. MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

03-02-2010, 02:56	#4
SCM As endorsed by Mr Black Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Hell/Scotland take your pick Posts: 443	Only thing with the 17-85mm when i had the Lens was i found it soft focus wise and the shots didn't come out as crisp as they should have. Might just have been my Lens but have heard other people saying the same thing might have changed since then though with newer builds. __________________ The sun is rising The screams have gone Too many have fallen Few still stand tall Is this the ending of what we've begun? Will we remember what we've done wrong?

04-02-2010, 11:52	#7
Davey_Pitch I iz speshul Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Liverpool Posts: 6,296	Is the only reason you're upgrading to close that 55-70mm gap you mentioned? The only reason I'm asking is that I found my 18-55mm IS lens to be very sharp, and even though the IQ on the Sigma is excellent from what I've seen, it didn't offer enough improvement to justify the cost of the upgrade. I found my 18-55mm plus the 55-250mm IS offered a great combination of quality, length, and affordability, though I don't know what lenses you have (I think you have the 70-300mm, which from what I've seen isn't quite as good as the 55-250mm IQ wise, though you do get the extra length). __________________ Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that most frightens us. Your playing small does not serve the world. There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you. We are all meant to shine as children do. It's not just in some of us; it is in everyone. And as we let our own lights shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.

13-02-2010, 19:23	#9
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	Abandoned the lens idea for now (I may still hire one, but I won't be buying). However, I'm considering an HD camcorder instead (shame the 450D doesn't 'do' video as that would have solved the problem). The issue I'm having is whether to risk getting an NTSC one while I'm over there (they can be as much as 1/3rd cheaper than the identical PAL version - mostly due to import duty and VAT). PS - I've already got a mini-DV camcorder, but I just never play the tapes back. I'd be surprised if the ones I've taken in the past even do play back without snapping now. I'm going all solid-state from now on. Last edited by Mark; 13-02-2010 at 19:26.

03-02-2010, 01:03	#3
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	I knew you had a Sigma something but couldn't remember the details. Haven't found a review yet (but haven't really been looking). Seems like a good lens though and hits the range I want. Loses out on IS but being faster in the first place will compensate - as will improving my camera holding technique. PS - I've already decided L glass isn't for me. Just can't justify it (lottery win excepted).

03-02-2010, 08:40	#6
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	I've been scanning TP, on both counts, so I've heard other reports of soft focus on the 17-85. Think I'll skip that one given that I'm trying to keep costs under control and I've got enough problems getting things in focus already. I'll certainly keep an eye on the second-hand market (including L glass), but the price gap being as wide as it is I'm not expecting much. So, looking like the Sigma or hiring a 15-85 (need to get in touch with Lensesforhire).

05-02-2010, 00:58	#8
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	IQ wise I think both the 55-250 and the 70-300 are pretty good. My personal view is the 70-300 is better built, but maybe the 55-250 does edge it in IQ (would be nice to find a side-by-side comparison). I got the 70-300 for the extra reach (which I needed when I got it and I'll need again this time). Ironically I've found I could have done with the 55-250 at the shorter end, but what's done is done and I'm not for changing it. I'll admit I don't like 'the gap' and that does motivate me, but it would also be nice to have a better walkabout lens. I've found that when I do take the camera out, I more often than not just take one lens, and I've made the mistake of just taking the 70-300 before.

13-02-2010, 22:01	#10
SCM As endorsed by Mr Black Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Hell/Scotland take your pick Posts: 443	Canon just bringing out a camera in the shape of the 550D soon which has a HD video option now. __________________ The sun is rising The screams have gone Too many have fallen Few still stand tall Is this the ending of what we've begun? Will we remember what we've done wrong?