User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  8
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Difference between 17-18mm?

  1. #1
    Member Divotor's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Oct 2010
    Location
    South Coast
    Posts
    8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Difference between 17-18mm?

    Hi All,

    Seems to be a common 'crossover' point in lenses. Just what is the difference between the eg. 17-85mm and the 18-85mm? What does that 10mm difference represent?.....seems to add to the price somewhat!
    Laymans terms please!

    Perhaps post a couple of comparison pics.

    My main interest are landscapes etc.
    Considering purchasing one such good quality lens instead of the usual two kit lenses. Your comments here will hopefully influence this choice!
    Regards

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Jul 2010
    Location
    South
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    um, you mean 'that 1mm difference'? You won't notice, at all. It's really nothing much to worry about. What 18-85mm lens are you referring to? Also, when comparing lenses, look at the apeture (the number that will read f3.5 or f2.8 for example) and whether it is contant or say f3.5-5.6. The lower the number, and whether or not it is 'fixed', will add dramatically to the price of a lens, among a lot of other things...
    Last edited by ZedEx; 12-10-2010 at 9:27pm.
    Canon stuff 5Dmk1 w/ 24-70 f2.8L, Canon 5Dmk1 w/70-200f2.8L, 100mm f2.8 macro, 50mm f1.4, 580exII
    Alienbees B800, Lumopro 160, Manfrotto 155XPROB w/ 498RC2, Lowepro ProRunner X450AW
    Phew!

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Jul 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The difference is 1mm, not 10mm as you mentioned.
    In terms of image size, for me, not so much difference.
    I have an old Canon 17-35mm f2.8L and have used a new 16-35mm f2.8L, and compared their images side by side.
    Image size wise, no big difference. Image quality wise, yes. The independent reviews do justice to the new 16-35mm f2.8L Mark II.
    Last edited by RaoulIsidro; 12-10-2010 at 9:35pm.
    "The greatest camera in the world is the one you hold in your hands when shit happens." ©2007 Raoul Isidro

  4. #4
    Member
    Threadstarter
    Divotor's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Oct 2010
    Location
    South Coast
    Posts
    8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hmmm...hence my learning curve begins.
    Just quoting what seem common lens sizes, but now you have added apeture sizes to the equation. Well perhaps I might get some tips in this area also!

  5. #5
    Member
    Threadstarter
    Divotor's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Oct 2010
    Location
    South Coast
    Posts
    8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So what is the difference (apart from price) between a fixed (ie. 2.6) and the others (ie. 3.5-5.6)? What won't one do that the other will?

    Ok...remembering that I'm mostly interested in landscapes and having that little bit of zoom if needed, budget around a grand. So after looking around a bit, lets try this one.....Canon 15-85mm EF-S f/3.5-5.6 IS USM...is anyone going to tell me this is not a fairly good lens?

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Jul 2010
    Location
    South
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'd suggest go to wikipedia and search for keywords like Apeture, F Stop, IS, USM etc. The smaller the f NUMBER, (but physically, a larger apeture) will result in:
    - more light entering the lens allowing faster shutter speeds while working in low light etc
    - less depth of field (think portraits where you isolate the subject from the background)

    I suggest boning up on the very basic, core fundamental aspects of photography: Apeture, Shutter Speed, ISO before embarking on expensive lens purchases not knowing what the nomenclature means.
    For the record though, i have heard good reports on the 15-85mm lens and it would be good for your average landscape shot and general walkabout lens

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2009
    Location
    Northern Beaches, Sydney
    Posts
    2,338
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The learning plan in the New To Photography section here will take you right through those concepts and more. A great starting point with practical exercises.

  8. #8
    Who let the rabble in? Lance B's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    8,054
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The difference between 17mm and 18mm is 1mm and about 6% more wide angle view for the 17mm lens. If you think that 6% is worth the extra, then get the 17mm rather than the 18mm. To put it into perspective, so to speak, it is the difference between a 200mm lens and a 212mm lens.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Dec 2009
    Location
    Macleay Island
    Posts
    1,639
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Divotor. If it is landscapes that you are mainly focusing ( excuse the pun ) on , then I would steer you more in the area of a sigma 10-20 or something of similar range. Have a look at some of the posts useing this type of lens. Also , take your camera into a store and just try every option . A fixed 2.8 is just that, 2.8 right across the range of the lens, but a 3.5-5.6 will vary its range depending on the light conditions. Remember, the lower the number, the less light needed, therefore better. Also think about a 50mm 2.8 as a good investment. Happy hunting.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Dec 2009
    Location
    Macleay Island
    Posts
    1,639
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I meant 50mm 1.8.

  11. #11
    Member achee's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Jul 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    340
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by maccaroneski View Post
    The learning plan in the New To Photography section here will take you right through those concepts and more. A great starting point with practical exercises.
    I'd second that, as well as recommending this site:

    http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html

    It's fairly easy to read and helped me when I was starting out.

Posting Permissions

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