User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: 2nd lens conundrum

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Sep 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    60
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    2nd lens conundrum

    Hi everyone,

    i have a 50d with a Tamron 18-270 lens. It isnt a bad lens and suits me pretty well given i travel a lot and dont want to cart a huge kit about.

    Anyway after a fair bit of investigative work i have found the 18-270 moves from forward focus to back focus through the zoom range, and hence a fair few dud pictures. I'm going to send it back for a warranty job but this will take 3-6 weeks, too long given i only have the one lens.

    So i 'need' another lens which is my conundrum. Most of my photography is outside, so light is generally ok, but varies from landscapes etc to children, pets etc.

    I did think to begin with a 50mm would be a decent move, maybe the 50mm f1.4 @ $400-500 (grey import). But now dont know if maybe the 24-105mm f4 @ $1,100ish may be a bit wiser and be more versitile. (or do I just have a case of L series lens envy). May i also add $$ isnt a huge issue, but as my wife says i am as tight as a fishes posterior.

    Does anyone have any thoughts on what i do?

    Cheers,
    Steve

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Dec 2009
    Location
    Macleay Island
    Posts
    1,639
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Sounds like a lot of us, confused! I would recommend a 50 1.8 ( can pick up a brand new one for about $130 ), Then keep thinking about which lens should be your next "Big" step. The 1.8 is a great little lens and you wont worry about the cost if you end up not useing it much.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Jul 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Have a look at the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM average RRP $535 at some shops.
    It has image stabilization and is a USM lens, and more importantly, it is a Canon.
    I have very low regard for 3rd party lenses (it's just me)
    Best to the new lens!
    "The greatest camera in the world is the one you hold in your hands when shit happens." ©2007 Raoul Isidro

  4. #4
    Ausphotography Veteran
    Join Date
    26 Nov 2008
    Location
    Booval, Qld (near Ipswich)
    Posts
    2,018
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If your not too worried about the money, I can highly recommend you take the plunge into the l world and get any of the following:
    24-70 2.8; all round great lens
    24-105 4; not quite as good (in my opinion, but the is a great thread here showing the difference to the 24-70)
    70-200; any of them. Not as good on the wide side for landscape, but really versatile, may never come off your camera once purchased.

    Before you take the plunge though, hire one or two for the weekend and give them a try. Easier to make up your mind that way.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Aug 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    252
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by RaoulIsidro View Post
    Have a look at the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM average RRP $535 at some shops.
    It has image stabilization and is a USM lens, and more importantly, it is a Canon.
    I have very low regard for 3rd party lenses (it's just me)
    Best to the new lens!
    I have found the 17-85 to be a great lens, not the sharpest around but a good versatile lens none the less.
    It is a big step up in quality from the 18-55 kit lens.
    If you're on a budget check eBay, good examples can be had for $300-$350. Just make sure you ask questions, especially about it's age, usage, etc.
    Last edited by unistudent1962; 04-10-2010 at 1:13pm.
    Mark

    Canon 70D w/Grip l Canon 60D w/Grip l EF 100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS USM l EF 70-200 f4L IS USM l EF-S 15-85 f3.5-5.6 IS USM l EF 100 f2.8 USM Macro l EF-S 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS STM l EF 50 f1.8 II l Canon EF-S 10-22 f3.5-4.5 USM l 430 EX II Flash l Rode Stereo VideoMic l Manfrotto 055XPROB + 498RC2 Tripod l Benro MP-96 M8 Monopod l Lowepro Vertex 200 AW Backpack l Lowepro Pro Runner 300 AW Backpack l PS CS5 Extended l Lightroom 4.3

  6. #6
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    13 Sep 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    60
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks to everyone,
    i'll take a look at the 17-85.
    The 24-70 is certainly worth considering but probably the price will beat me.

    cheers

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    27 Sep 2007
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    346
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by tarwoona View Post
    Thanks to everyone,
    i'll take a look at the 17-85.
    The 24-70 is certainly worth considering but probably the price will beat me.

    cheers
    Dos it have to be canon sigma do two 24 70 2.8s
    Thanks Steve
    Winer of the sheep week 2 + 6
    www.atkimages.com.au "If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough," ROBERT CAPA"
    Tokina 16-28 f2.8 PRO FX,Sigma 500 4.5 Ex DG, Canon 5D Mii, Canon 7D, Canon 2x converter,Canon 70-200 2.8 L,
    Sigma 120-300 2.8 EX, Sigma 24-70 2.8 EX, Canon 1.4x converter, Canon 580 ex 2 speed light
    And two canon kit Lenses.

  8. #8
    Today may be the day, Or not ! Roosta's Avatar
    Join Date
    31 Jul 2010
    Location
    Perth Northern Suburbs
    Posts
    3,702
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Tarwoona, If you look just below your post on the Canon Link, you will see I posted the same sort of questions re General Purpose Lens, got some great feedback,

    Best of luck, too many choises, but the two CANON 24-70 or 24-105 seem like great options, and yes, maybe L envy. But who cares.
    They call me "Blue" it's a red head thing.
    "My Flickr Site"
    Canon Bodies - 1DMk2N + 50D - Lenses - 17-35mm F2.8 L - 24-70mm F2.8 L - 70-200mm F2.8 L - 300mm F4 IS L - Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 - Sigma 10-20mm
    " I Never get tired of looking at our diverse country, even if its through the lens of someone else".
    CC is always appreciated.


  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    02 Sep 2010
    Location
    near Toowoomba
    Posts
    344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    maybe a canon 100 Macro
    fairly cheap, $500-$600 I think, good for portrait and macro
    lots of fun things to shoot if you like bugs....
    I haven't got mine yet
    50D, 50 f/1.8, 24-105L, 70-200L f/2.8 IS 11, Understanding Wife
    Photos - Panoramio - Flickr -

    A man is not old until regrets take the place of dreams. - John Barrymore -

  10. #10
    Ausphotography Regular Bercy's Avatar
    Join Date
    05 Nov 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,481
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think the salient point is that you want a versatile travel lens. If I read between the lines, you do not want a drag a trolley full of lenses about. I have a 28-105 Canon that stays on most of time. It light, not obstrusive and unlike a big white 70-200L, doesn't attract attention. The L series 24-105, F4, lets a bit more light in across the telephoto range and I would hope has better optics. The purpose 90% of the time should dictate use, I reckon.
    Berni

  11. #11
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    13 Sep 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    60
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks Bercy (and everyone else)

    You've hit the nail on the head, i think. The 18-270 was bought to serve a purpose and although it does perfectly, it isnt as good as hoped (and now dont expect it to be even after a warrenty job hopefully impoves things). i dont have the space or enthusiasm to cart a bag full of lenses about, particulaly given i travel mostly for work with a bag full of work stuff anyway (Far East Russia, India, China, Indo, USA to name a few and yes they are ALL third world countries where excess bags doesnt work).
    Time to go cap in hand with a good excuse to the minister for warfare for an understanding as to why i have a new 24-105. Sorry put that wrongly, she wont understand but may consent to me 'blowing' $1,100.
    Good luck Stephen.

    Cheers,
    Steve

  12. #12
    Account Closed
    Join Date
    21 Jul 2010
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    422
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Remember Steve the 24-105 won't have any wide angle in its zoom range on your 50D. If that's your goal, OK, but if you want a wide-to-tele zoom of better quality than the old superzoom the best options are the 15-85 (overall) or the 17-55 (if f2,8 constant aperture is useful to you).

Posting Permissions

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