Walk'round Glass Discussion

[irangejuice]

---

Hey guys,


After almost 5 months of kit lens usage, I finally feel the need for a good walk around lens. I think it was Minuano who posted a link directing me to a 28-105 lens back when i was still deciding if i should buy the kit lens. Now, I've stumbled upon the same link and found the 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. I've done some reading about it and I'm really impressed with this glass. There are some mixed opinions, however, and well it got me thinking..

Does anyone here have any good experience with it?

Anyone, got a good substitute for this particular need?


Thanks everyone.

[darkwing]

if money is no subject, and don't feel the need to go for FF, EFS 17-55 F2.8 IS is the way to go, scores very highly, even beating (optically) equivalent L lenses in the same range, sweet....it really depends on your budget but as they say its in the photographer not the equipment...some of the best are just using primes, instead of zooms hehe like Ansel Adams

[laagan]

For a crop body, in my experience 28mm isn't wide enough for a walkaround lens, but you might find it okay for your shots. This is exactly why Canon released the EFS 17-85 which is the equivalent of the EF 28-135 in a crop body. I had this lens for about a year with my 20d and although it is kinda overpriced IMO, it had the perfect focal length as far walkaround shots are concerned. If you have the budget, go with the newer and faster EFS 17-55 as darkwing has suggested. If you plan to stick with a crop body for a while, I'd say get this lens, it's the best wide to normal zoom (f/2.8 with IS) at the moment.

[pnoize]

take a look at third party lenses like tamron or sigma. Beor's tamron lens is definitely good walking-around lens.

[irangejuice]

Thanks for the input you guys

After considering everything here's my glass-shopping-plan to be spread in a 2-year time frame:

EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM for disney, street, and the likes
a lens in the 10~24 range for wide
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM for reach

[abortretryfail]

You could also conisder the Sigma AF 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC macro

Sigma has positioned the AF 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC macro in one of the sweet spots of the market. It is priced beyond the (usually pretty crappy) kit zooms yet it still remains within the reach of budget shoppers. Even better than that it delivers a performance which matches and sometimes even exceeds more expensive lenses. This includes the in-house competition (AF 18-50mm f/2.8 EX) as well as genuine brand lenses (such as the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM IS). All in all the lens has only one really weak spot - 17mm at wide-open aperture where the extreme border performance is soft and vignetting is quite pronounced (but still not worse than the direct competition). At medium aperture settings the delivered quality is very impressive. Combine that with the quite decent build quality and fast AF and it doesn't need a genius to foresee that this lens will be a quite hot seller.

for the rest of the review click here:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...2845/index.htm

and some sample shots here:

http://www.pbase.com/jimcreek/sigma_1770_test_report

and what local photographers are saying:

http://photo.blogger.ph/2006/03/06/s...8-45-dc-macro/

[irangejuice]

I'm back to being confused again.

If you guys aren't too tired of giving your own opinions please feel free to comment.

Right now, I'm really leaning towards the Canon 28-135. I really like the effect of having a 1.6 factor on the 135mm end of the Canon lens. Last Saturday, I was able to borrow BeoR's Tamron 24-135mm and the 24mm end didn't seem much of a problem. I've kept it with me longer than I should've mainly because I'm just looking through the glass at stuff I would've taken pictures of. If 24mm doesn't feel too bad then maybe the 28mm won't be as bad either?

The 17-70 looks awesome too. Just as good performance-wise (I think) and it comes with a petal hood for cheaper than the Canon. At 70mm, I feel that I'm coming up short (only way i tested a 70mm was with BeoR's tamron @ 70mm).

Also, am I missing a lot when the Sigma isn't offering an IS technology with this lens?

I'm still a long way from a 70-200 2.8L too..

Sigh. What to do?

[darkwing]

how about the Tamron 28-75? I am going to buy this really soon... it even beats out the 24-70 F2.8L at some areas at 1/3 the price haha

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

but if you feel 75mm is too short for you hmm that is going to be a problem hmmm how much is your budget for a walk around lens? the tammy is just 22.5k brand new

[BeoR]

You should add the Canon 24-105 f/4L IS to your list, it is a good walkaround lens...

For me this would be my "dream" "must have" lens lineup:

- Sigma 12-24mm (coz it's fullframe compatible)
- Canon 24-70 f/2.8L
- Canon 70-200 f/2.8L or Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 DG EX Macro
- Canon 50mm f/1.4
- Canon 85mm f/1.8
- Canon 100mm Macro Lens
- Canon 200mm f/1.8L
- Canon 300mm f/2.8L

[darkwing]

well locally, the Canon 24-105 F4L IS costs abouts 67,500, but it is really a "dream lens" for me hehe otherwise ill just be content on getting that tammy, preferably 2nd hand para cheaper