Walk around lens for 30D

[kolky]

I have had point and shoot digital cameras for a while now and I have decided to make the step up to a digital SLR. I have pretty much decided that I am going to go with the Canon 30D as the body but I would like some feedback on which first lens I should get with it to use as a walk around lens. I like taking pictures of landscapes, architecture, and portraits and often enjoy shooting in low light.

I have found a few lenses that look interesting and was wondering which one people thought was best for my first lens. Here is what I have been looking at so far. I would like to keep this lens under $500.

Canon 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM EF Lens
Canon Zoom Super Wide Angle EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Autofocus Lens
Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF]
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR MACRO ASPHER

I also like to take pictures of wildlife so in the future I plan to get the Canon 70-300 f4-5.6 IS.

I wondering for the walkaround lens if it is better to go for a faster lens or IS?

Which one of these do you think would be best or are there others I should be looking at?

[kolky]

Just wanted to add one other lens to the mix. I was just looking at Canon's rebate form and it seems like I can get $90 off the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L lens which would bring the price to just a little over $500 so I would consider this as well.

[repoman]

I also just decided that I'm going for the Canon 17-40L, don't forget that if you get that along with 30D you get another $100 off the body

[Clyde]

Just wanted to add one other lens to the mix. I was just looking at Canon's rebate form and it seems like I can get $90 off the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L lens which would bring the price to just a little over $500 so I would consider this as well.

Well, one of these lenses is an "L" and the others aren't. L lenses are going to be the top of the line. The drawback to the 17-40 is that it doesn't open up very far (f/4) meaning that it isn't great for low light situations. However, at the wide focal length of the 17-40, a wide aperture leaves a very thin depth of field. Also, the 17-40 doesn't have a very long range. Pair it with the 70-300 IS you are looking at, and you would have a fine kit. Without the 70-300, though, you might feel the lack of the telephoto range.

While the 17-40 gives you top of the line optical quality, you might check out the new 17-55 EF-S f/2.8 IS (http://www.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/masterid=19432409/search=17-55+canon/ut=47d0e815efdbd239). Sorry to mention something so far out of your budget, but this lens was designed to meet your requirements precisely. It is the only lens out there that really does everything you want.

Good Luck,

Clyde

[kjosker]

if you are walking in urban areas, a lens with wide angle capability is useful, which is one of the benefits of a DSLR over a P&S, the ability to get truly wide angle lenses.

Considering the 30D is a 1.6 camera, you don't really get a wide angle effect until you get below 20mm focal lengths. If the 17-40 is not practical for you, then the 17-85 looks like a possibility. What about the kit lens?

Also, analyze your shooting preferences up to now; if most of your shooting was telephoto before, it will probably continue that way with the 30D. So a wide angle wouldn't be used as much as you might think. And vice versa.

Lastly, don't be afraid to consider used lenses. Sources for used lenses are online retailers, eBay, and your local camera shop may carry used lenses, or at possibly consignments. In buying used, know your values and conditions.

[Clyde]

If the 17-40 is not practical for you, then the 17-85 looks like a possibility.


That lens (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=222&sort=7&cat=27&page=3) isn't very well thought of (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=84712&postcount=16), as one person says:

"Its not a very good lens, a cheap lens with IS tacked on." or...

"I think if i could do it all over again, I would fork out a few more dallars and get the 17-40L "

Clyde

[drew_viii]

canon 17-85 is a crappy lens for 30D... i had this lens less than a month a decided to sell it, to expensive for the quality that is not as good as other cheaper lens, tamraon 17-50 sounds nice, or you can also consider the sigma 18-50 which is bit cheaper than the tamron one (just bought the sigma lens hihi, waiting the delivery). another good lens is the tamron 28-75, which won several awards for its sharpness and picture quality for its price... though you will lose the wide angle section due to 30D's 1.6 crop...

a better idea is go to shops and try those lens. then you will see which suits for you... some people say 17-85 is a nice lens, but for somebody else its a crappy one for its price... dont let the reviews bother your decision, best of all is to try it out and look some sample pictures all over the net... good luck in your search and welcome your new 30D... its a great camera

[kolky]

All,

Thanks for your advice. Here is what I ended up with:

Canon 30D body
Canon 28-135 IS
Canon 50mm f/1.8

After the rebate it should end up at about $1350 for the package. I thought that was a pretty good deal.

My thoughts are that in the future when I get the 70-300IS I will sell the 28-135 and either buy the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 or Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (depening on how much money I have to spend at the time).

Thanks again for your thoughts and I'm looking forward to receiving my camera.

[unix04]

hmm...you might want to reconsider. you wanted landscape and architecture and low light, but the Canon 28-135 IS is not wide enough(imo), nor will it give you the low light performance you might want.

if you think you can live without the command dial and the build of the 30D, i'd suggest getting the XTi + tamron to start. you should be able to beat the $1350 package for your 30D.

$800 for xti (can be found for much lower online)
$450 for tamron 17-50
setup total of $1250

you can opt not to get the 50mm f1.8, since the tammy should provide you with the 50mm focal range at 2.8 aperture. but even if you do get it, it's still under $1350.

for your architecture/landscape needs, i dont think you really need the 5fps. spot metering can come handy, so think about how often you might need to use spot metering and determine whether that feature is a dealbreaker.

also, some people might not like this idea, but consider getting the xti for now, and saving up over the next few months. if you really feel the 30D is what you need, sell the xti and buy the 30D. you should be able to sell the xti without losing too much residual value if you sell before the year ends. you will lose out on some money and also face the hassle of selling your camera, but i see it as insurance to get the best of what you need, and you pay a small premium for that.

[Scott6]

what about the 70-200 f4L?

[michaelb]

I have had point and shoot digital cameras for a while now and I have decided to make the step up to a digital SLR. I have pretty much decided that I am going to go with the Canon 30D as the body but I would like some feedback on which first lens I should get with it to use as a walk around lens. I like taking pictures of landscapes, architecture, and portraits and often enjoy shooting in low light.

I have found a few lenses that look interesting and was wondering which one people thought was best for my first lens. Here is what I have been looking at so far. I would like to keep this lens under $500.

Canon 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM EF Lens
Canon Zoom Super Wide Angle EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Autofocus Lens
Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF]
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR MACRO ASPHER

I also like to take pictures of wildlife so in the future I plan to get the Canon 70-300 f4-5.6 IS.

I wondering for the walkaround lens if it is better to go for a faster lens or IS?

Which one of these do you think would be best or are there others I should be looking at?

In my opinion, the 28-135 and 28-75 are not be wide enough on a crop body for a "walk around" lens.

The Tamron 17-50 f2.8 that you mention is supposed to be a great lens.

You may also want to consider the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5.

Either of the above lenses paired with the 70-300 IS that you mention would make for a nice set-up.

[adam75south]

well from pictures i've seen posted on here and the price, i'd have to say the 17-50 f/2.8 from tamron.