PDA

View Full Version : Canon EF-S 17-85 4-5.6 lens



JayK
05-20-2005, 12:28 PM
I am in a quandry. I am thinking about buying the 20D. HOwever, the kit lens id not a sufficient zoom. The 17-85 (28-135 approx) seems to have the range I want, but at 4-5.6 it seems like a slow lens.

It lists for $599--seems very high for a slow lens. Wonder why Canon offers a slow lens for such a great model camera.

Maybe then thinking about buying a Canon Powershot Pro 1, and save about $1,200!! Any thoughts?

THANK YOU

TheObiJuan
05-20-2005, 01:59 PM
Get the 20D without the kit lens. Put your money towards some better, faster, glass.

Why not primes? A wide angle prime, a standard lens, and something like the 135 f/2.8?

IS on a lens with that small of a focal length is useless. Who cares if you can handhold 1/15th if you still get motion blur?

IS on 135 and up is nice and necessary. The f/4 min. aperture doesn't allow for much background seperation or background blur either.



Please do not compare the 20D to the Pro1.
The Chevy Z06 to Chevy malibu would be a similar comparison.

JayK
05-20-2005, 03:16 PM
Thanks for the feedback. I do not want to get into a bunch of lenses. That's what I did with my film Nikons over the years until I stopped carrying them!. I was hoping for a good travel size, and the 17-85 is good for me, but the aperature and price...

Nice to hear someone confirming the glory of the 20D.


Get the 20D without the kit lens. Put your money towards some better, faster, glass.

Why not primes? A wide angle prime, a standard lens, and something like the 135 f/2.8?

IS on a lens with that small of a focal length is useless. Who cares if you can handhold 1/15th if you still get motion blur?

IS on 135 and up is nice and necessary. The f/4 min. aperture doesn't allow for much background seperation or background blur either.



Please do not compare the 20D to the Pro1.
The Chevy Z06 to Chevy malibu would be a similar comparison.

D70FAN
05-20-2005, 03:46 PM
Thanks for the feedback. I do not want to get into a bunch of lenses. That's what I did with my film Nikons over the years until I stopped carrying them!. I was hoping for a good travel size, and the 17-85 is good for me, but the aperature and price...

Nice to hear someone confirming the glory of the 20D.

While at the same aperture range the Sigma 18-125 may help as a day to day shooter. About the only complaint that I have with it is slight vigneting at the extremes. Fairly easy to post process out. For $270 it is pretty remarkable.

I have only tried the Sigma 18-200 briefly, and initial shots looked pretty good. I can't really recommend it yet, but hopefully will be able to buy and test one next week. But still a relatively normal lens aperture-wise.

Other than the Tamron 28-70 f2.8 (about $370) there isn't a whole lot out there in the sub $600 fast-glass catagory.

I'm pretty sure everyone here likes the 20D and considers it to be best in class. But I'm not sure about glory. ;)