User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Best kit lens upgrade option?

  1. #1
    Member Timmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    14 Mar 2010
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Best kit lens upgrade option?

    So as the title says im currently looking into upgrading my kit lens. Read a lot of reviews and done a lot of research, so thought i would ask on here for some opinions also.

    OK i have a Canon 450D with 18-55 IS, 55-250 IS and a 50mm 1.8. Im looking to upgrade the 18-55 IS to something better. Its the lens i use the most and atm im not happy with it tbh. I want something that is better image quality wise. I mainly enjoy landscape, automotive, long exposure and just general everyday photography. So need something that will handle those things better than my current lens, and as i use filters cant have a rotating front element. Budget can be streteched if necessary but dont wanna spend much more than $600 is possible. Buying second hand im ok with i suppose, unless im stupid thinking about grabbing someones seconds?

    Main candidates im currently looking at are the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 (non VC) and the Canon 17-40L f4 (would have to be second hand). Any other suggestions? Have read into the Sigma 18-50 but most seem to think its not as good as the Tamron. And the Sigma 17-70 i have sorta ruled out as it doesnt have a permanent minimum aperture, its 2.8 - 4.5. And the Canon 17-85 seems to be not a lot better than the standard kits lens. The Canon 15-85 is too expensive new and have not seen one FS second hand. Plus again, not sure if its a difference over the prices of the other lenses i mentioned?

    Tamron is cheaper even than the Canon even second hand. Neither have a form of image stabilisation but that doesnt concern me. Like the Tamron as its a quicker lens, but it doenst have FTM and have read its noisy. Like the Canon for its fantastic build quality and great IQ, but it is slower accross its shorter range and i cant afford it new.

    Opinions on either of those i have suggested? Even if you haven't used either would love to know. Also anything else i should consider?

    Any help would be fantastic

    Cheers
    Timmy

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    30 Dec 2009
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    266
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You should consider a Canon 15-85 as as well as its a great sharp lens.
    Bodies : Canon 450D, Canon 7D
    Lenses : Canon 15-85 f3.5-5.6 IS USM, Canon 100mm F2.8 Makro USM, Canon 24-70 L F2.8 USM, Canon 70-200 L F4, Canon 100-400 L F4.5-5.6L IS USM
    Editing : Photoshop CS5

  3. #3
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,136
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    The Sigma 24-70 f2.8 is a really good lens (if 24 is wide enough for your needs), my 24-70 is the sharpest lens I own.
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    07 Aug 2007
    Location
    Newcastle, NSW
    Posts
    321
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    When I was using a 400D I upgraded first to 17-85mm which I was pleased with at the time, until I bought Canon 24-70mm. Then I knew why L Glass was worth the money.

    Buy it once, is the best advice I've been given.

  5. #5
    Member dsaini's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Jan 2010
    Location
    Ringwood
    Posts
    47
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Tamron 17-50mm f2.8

  6. #6
    Member TimCz's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Feb 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    44
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have the 17-40 and couldnt be more happy with it. Very sharp across the range with only minimal reduction in the corners.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    12 May 2009
    Location
    Cronulla
    Posts
    74
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I wonder if I may "piggyback" on your thread here, Timmy? I too need to upgrade to something faster than the 18-55 f3.5 kit for the Pentax K10D that also has 1:1 macro for work (non-photographic;engineering parts). I have a Sigma 10-20 f4 so that focal length is covered. The sigma 24 - 70 would be OK that Ricktas mentioned. I'll check it out. Thanks

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    12 May 2009
    Location
    Cronulla
    Posts
    74
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The above 24 - 70 Sigma lens with Macro that Ricktas mentioned is $707 at Digital Camera Warehouse. It's macro is 1:3.8. That'll do me, I think. (I didn't really expect 1:1 in a zoom)

    For some reason I ciuldn't add this as an edit in my above post.
    Last edited by jibbonpoint; 24-03-2010 at 9:08pm.

  9. #9
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,136
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jibbonpoint View Post
    The above 24 - 70 Sigma lens with Macro that Ricktas mentioned is $707 at Digital Camera Warehouse. It's macro is 1:3.8. That'll do me, I think. (I didn't really expect 1:1 in a zoom)

    For some reason I ciuldn't add this as an edit in my above post.
    Members can only edit their posts for 60 minutes from the original post time, then they are locked.

  10. #10
    Member
    Threadstarter
    Timmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    14 Mar 2010
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Have changed my mind almost daily so far lol

    Leaning towards the 17-40mm atm, given its build quality, image quality, and if i do something i like to do it right the first time. Its not a lens i see getting and then upgrading from at a later stage, where as the Tamron i see me wanting better at a later stage

  11. #11
    Member quoccy's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Mar 2009
    Location
    **Suburb/Town Required**
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    spend abit more and get the 17-55 IS, there was one forsale for around $1,000 second hand I think

  12. #12
    Ausphotography Regular wideangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Sep 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    1,460
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Consider the Canon 17-40mm L lens as this will give you similar focal length to the kit lens, but a more rugged build and L lens quality. Also if you ever go full frame then this lens will become wide angle on it.
    please ask before PP my images

    "Life is what happens to you while your busy making other plans"

  13. #13
    Member beaco's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Mar 2010
    Location
    MEL
    Posts
    46
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    not sure if you are still looking. Tamron now makes a 17-50 with vc (stablisation). Most reviews seem positive and it's cheaper than the canon. Main drawback seems to be noisier focus motor and slightly slower focusing. Also vc take a second to kick in. I think I'm going to get one rather than canon 17-55 2.8 and save some money.

    If you did buy something - what did you get?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •