Walk-around lens for Canon Rebel XT

[snap]

I am an old (in years) fomer SLR hobbiest, planning to buy a Canon Rebel XT. I have enjoyed reading the forum and have learned much. However, I have questions about a good walk-around lense. A couple of questions: 1. For the basic lens should I get the EF 50 mm f/1.4 USM instead of the EF 50 f/1.8 II? I will be doing mostly outdoor shooting, landsapes and some people. From what I have read, with current digital SLRs, the stated focal length of a lense is extended in digital camera, e.g, a 50mm lense might equate to 80mm on a film camera. So, might I want something less than 50mm for a standard lens?

2. What is a good utility lense? I have seen much in the forum about Sigma and Tamron lenses in various focal lenghts (18-125; 18-200). How would the Canon EF-S 17-85 IS USM do as a walk-around. How would it compare with the Sigma or Tamaron lenses?

In advance, thanks for your opinions and recommendations.

[Rhys]

The Tamron 28-75 is pretty good. If you're sure you won't want to use a full-frame camera in the future then go for the Sigma 18-125. Personally, I won't touch cropped only lenses just in case I go full-frame in the future.

[snap]

Thanks for your reply. I was not familiar with the term "crop" as it applies to the hardware. I found a web site: http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon...0D_lenses.html
that explained the term. If I understand it correctly, cropping has to do with the sensor in the camera. That is, a smaller than normal (the film SLR cameras) sensor produces a cropping affect. This will result in the effective focal lenght of a lens being longer than the stated focal length. In regard to my original question, is the Canon Rebel XT "cropping" the pictures or would a particualar lens be cropping the picture? Or both?

[timmciglobal]

It's an effect of the "camera system and lens design" that is to say: a 70>200 lens mounted on a XT will be an effective focal length of 112>320. Take the "glass" and crop out the center 40% thats what the sensor is "doing" effectivly. You are not technically "zooming" so much as croping. The lens is still a 200 MM lens but you've taken the picture and croped it by 60% resulting in the XT's image sensor size. This causes the same "issues" with shutter time and focus because it's the same as taking a 50 mm shot and enlarging it 4 times, if it's 1/4 dof out of focus or 1 pixel blurred the new "blur" or dof will appear 4 times worse.

The 17-85 IS is good if you like wide angel, the 28-135 IS is good if you don't use wide that much, the 24-105 L Is would be best (but cost more then the XT) and then you have other ones like 28-75 2.8, 18-125, 18-200 etc.

Tim

[24Peter]

If you don't want to get into "L" territory and since you're doing mostly outside shooting, my vote goes for the Canon 28-105 3.5-4.5 II USM.
http://www.canogacamera.com/e/env/00...m=invnew:51372
Really hard to beat the price/quality combination on this lens.

[ReValveiT]

If you don't want to get into "L" territory and since you're doing mostly outside shooting, my vote goes for the Canon 28-105 3.5-4.5 II USM.
http://www.canogacamera.com/e/env/00...m=invnew:51372
Really hard to beat the price/quality combination on this lens.

Dito...

I just got this Lens yesterday and I have to say, it is excellent for the money (better, IMO than the 17-40L I had for a few days) Plus it's full-frame, unlike the 17-85mm IS you mention.

[timmciglobal]

Full frame is pointless unless you are going to be getting a 5D. Canon has already said they are keeping 1.6 and FF not killing 1.6 anytime soon.

I didn't like the copy of the 105 I had, the 28-135 on other hand I love.

Tim

[TheObiJuan]

I agree about FF lenses being pointless for crop camera people.
If canon were to make a small crop version of the 24-105L I would get it in a heartbeat. Knowing canon it would be ugly, plastic, and missing the exotic elements. Then they would charge the same ammount as the 24-105L.
You gotta love canon.
I do like taking advantage of the sweetspot, though.

[ReValveiT]

Ah, but having a full-frame Lens has its advantages on an APC-C Camera; it cuts out the edges leaving you with the 'sweet spot' image centre. With a Digital-only Lens you're using the whole image circle, warts n' all.

I'm not adverse to Digital-only Lenses; I have a couple myself.

[Rhys]

But if you get only cropped lenses, you're restricted if you want to try a film camera or if you want to get a full-frame camera later.

This reminds me of how we all said we didn't see any point in more than 3 megapixels, a few years back....