What Canon lens to buy ?

[Raaf Hornet]

Hi all, I own a 50D, but Im using the the 28-80 usm lens that came with my Canon SLR film camera. Would it be beneficial to buy a 17 - 85 IS or something else or is what I have just as good ? Money is a factor in my purchasing............ according to the wife. Thanks for any input, Jeff

[Old Skool]

If it is the first series 28-80, that is a beaut lens. You can tell if it has a metal mount. This one has the ring USM & FTM focus. The later ones are plastic and nowhere as good.
The 17-85 or even better value, the 17-135 will give you a wider field of view, plus more length. The 28mm on the 50D is not wide at all and you will find it limiting.

[Raaf Hornet]

Thanks for the reply Russell, unfortunately the one I have has the plastic mount. I have found the lens limiting, would the 17-85 be better ? I was looking at the 17-85's on ebay, which are going for around $350 which would suit my........... the wifes budget, regards, Jeff

[rwg717]

This question is about like the "length of a piece of string", I see you are limited in your budget so I guess the 17-85 would be the shot and the price of these is well down with the $A up so high. There are better options but a lot more money involved, I recently invested in the Canon 17-40 f4 L, it's about 50% more $ than the 17-85 and probably too wide for what you want but the image quality of the 17-40 is at least 200% ABOVE THE 17-85.

Sigma make an terrific stabilized 17-70 lens which I have used with excellent results, a little more money than the 17-85 but less than the 17-40 Canon....difficult question to answer with any certainty....best of luck:D
Richard

P.S. Remember that camera bodies go out of fashion very quickly but investment in a good lens lasts for many years.

[Raaf Hornet]

Thanks for the reply Richard, What Im after is something that that will take nice sharp images and suited to my camera.

And your statement - P.S. Remember that camera bodies go out of fashion very quickly but investment in a good lens lasts for many years. rings very true in my ears, I've just got to consider cost, regards, Jeff

[Old Skool]

Also look at the 18-135 IS lens, Google reviews on both lens to compare. I have the 18-135 lens and find it really sharp and a great general purpose lens which I believe is similar price on EBay.

[RaoulIsidro]

The EF-S lens I would recommend for the 50D is the 10-22mm super wide.
For the rest, try to get "L" lenses, or EF.

[RamblinR]

Go for either the older 17-85 or the 18-135. Either of these lenses would be much better than the lens you are currently using.

[Tatts]

What about the Canon 15-85mm?

[unistudent1962]

If youre on a budget, and don't mind buying secondhand, have a look on eBay for Canon 17-85 IS lenses. I picked one up last December for $400 with CPL & UV Filters, and genuine hood. With the number of people ubgrading, you can probably pick one up for $300 - $350. I have been very happy with the quality compared to the non-IS 18-55 kit lens it replaced.

Just make sure you ask questions about its history, age, damage, how many owners it's had etc.

[ZedEx]

the 17-85 has been the least sharp lens I have ever owned. My old 18-55 on my 350D was sharper. They're really cheap because there aren't very many good copies of them out there. Buyer beware


If youre on a budget, and don't mind buying secondhand, have a look on eBay for Canon 17-85 IS lenses. I picked one up last December for $400 with CPL & UV Filters, and genuine hood. With the number of people ubgrading, you can probably pick one up for $300 - $350. I have been very happy with the quality compared to the non-IS 18-55 kit lens it replaced.

Just make sure you ask questions about its history, age, damage, how many owners it's had etc.

[pod3009]

I have to disagree with ZedEx, based on my experience. I have the 17-85 lens - it came on my 40D, and my wife has the 18-55 which came on her 450D. We both now have a 50D. The 17-85 is far sharper than the 18-55. I would recommend that over the 18-135mm as well. My wife moved to that after the 18-55. Nice focal length, but given its prone to lens creep, and that it is not as sharp as the 17-85, the 17-85 would be my choice. This is just my experience though!

[unistudent1962]

We keep hearing this notion of "good" and "bad" copies of lenses.
I must have been very lucky since buying into the Canon system, from the first 18-55 (non IS) and 75-300 (non-IS) purchased as a kit with a 400D (my first DSLR), onto the 50 f1.8, then a 17-85 IS USM, an 18-55 IS purchased when I upgraded to a 550D (my teenage daughter inherited the 400D), to a 70-200 f4L IS, as far as I can tell I haven't had a "bad" lens.

The image quality of the 18-55 IS and 17-85 IS USM are superior to the original non-IS lenses, and the 50 f1.8 and 70-200 f4L IS are FAR superior to them all. But isn't this what's expected of primes, and L lenses?

As a side point, I sold the original kit lenses on eBay earlier this year for more than they cost me when I bought them as part of the 400D kit.

My advice to newcomers was, and still is, if you are on a budget, buy what you can afford to get started, gain an understanding of what lenses do what, develop your style, then upgrade when you have a better idea of your needs.

If you have deep pockets buy L lenses, then sell them to some lucky buyer at depreciated prices when you discover they don't suit your needs.

[gje38752]

I agree with Unistudent, I started with 450D with 17=55 IS lens kit , it took me awhile to realise they wern't such a bad lens at all, however I upgraded to 15=85 after finding they were much upgraded from the 17/85, but of course they are a fair bit cheaper than the 15/85.
I now have the 15/85 on a 50D and find that combo does everything that I need.

[Raaf Hornet]

Thanks to everyone who took the time to reply, I have now bought myself a 17-85 IS lens, hoping to pick it up tomorrow. Looking forward to taking some half decent shots now !