Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > better canon lenses

Reply
Thread Tools

better canon lenses

 
 
Rob
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-03-2012
Friend has a Canon 550D camera and would like to buy a new lens.

Quote:

"I'm thinking of buying a new all purpose lens. I feel my Canon EFS
18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens is not that great. I'm looking at the EFS
17-85 f/4-5.6 IS USM (cheap > $340, maybe not much better than what I
already have) or EFS 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (dear > $600, large
diameter, very sharp, ). Also the EFS 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM which is
probably overkill for my EOS 550D - heavy and expensive lens > $860.

Any recommendations?"
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Wally
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-03-2012
On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 18:21:28 +1000, Rob <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Friend has a Canon 550D camera and would like to buy a new lens.
>
>Quote:
>
>"I'm thinking of buying a new all purpose lens. I feel my Canon EFS
>18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens is not that great. I'm looking at the EFS
>17-85 f/4-5.6 IS USM (cheap > $340, maybe not much better than what I
>already have) or EFS 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (dear > $600, large
>diameter, very sharp, ). Also the EFS 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM which is
>probably overkill for my EOS 550D - heavy and expensive lens > $860.
>
>Any recommendations?"


Depends...

The 15-85mm is excellent, but is heavy compared to the kit lens. Also,
it is slow, and is expensive (but less if bought with a body).

The 18-135mm has terrific zoom range, for which it trades off optical
performance.

The 17-55mm is a wonderful lens and could be the right choice if you
need good low light performance. But it is expensive and double the
weight of the 18-55mm lens.

There's a lot to be said for the 18-55mm kit lens because performance
is adequate, it is cheap, and it is very light... the best choice for
roaming around all day in interesting new places.

So your friend should prioritize weight, reach, optical performance,
cost, and low light performance.

W
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rob
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-04-2012
On 4/07/2012 6:22 AM, Wally wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 18:21:28 +1000, Rob <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Friend has a Canon 550D camera and would like to buy a new lens.
>>
>> Quote:
>>
>> "I'm thinking of buying a new all purpose lens. I feel my Canon EFS
>> 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens is not that great. I'm looking at the EFS
>> 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS USM (cheap > $340, maybe not much better than what I
>> already have) or EFS 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (dear > $600, large
>> diameter, very sharp, ). Also the EFS 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM which is
>> probably overkill for my EOS 550D - heavy and expensive lens > $860.
>>
>> Any recommendations?"

>
> Depends...
>
> The 15-85mm is excellent, but is heavy compared to the kit lens. Also,
> it is slow, and is expensive (but less if bought with a body).
>
> The 18-135mm has terrific zoom range, for which it trades off optical
> performance.
>
> The 17-55mm is a wonderful lens and could be the right choice if you
> need good low light performance. But it is expensive and double the
> weight of the 18-55mm lens.
>
> There's a lot to be said for the 18-55mm kit lens because performance
> is adequate, it is cheap, and it is very light... the best choice for
> roaming around all day in interesting new places.
>
> So your friend should prioritize weight, reach, optical performance,
> cost, and low light performance.
>
> W
>



Thanks

I sort of know which lenses suit myself or wander out with a specific
lens. I have used Nikon many years which enables me to suck up that
information. lenses v's performance. My GP lens is the 24-120 has been
for many years now.

As for Canon they have so many lenses in the GP lens bracket I would not
have the slightest, what to pick.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wally
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-04-2012
On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 12:31:55 +1000, Rob <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On 4/07/2012 6:22 AM, Wally wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 18:21:28 +1000, Rob <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> Friend has a Canon 550D camera and would like to buy a new lens.
>>>
>>> Quote:
>>>
>>> "I'm thinking of buying a new all purpose lens. I feel my Canon EFS
>>> 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens is not that great. I'm looking at the EFS
>>> 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS USM (cheap > $340, maybe not much better than what I
>>> already have) or EFS 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (dear > $600, large
>>> diameter, very sharp, ). Also the EFS 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM which is
>>> probably overkill for my EOS 550D - heavy and expensive lens > $860.
>>>
>>> Any recommendations?"

>>
>> Depends...
>>
>> The 15-85mm is excellent, but is heavy compared to the kit lens. Also,
>> it is slow, and is expensive (but less if bought with a body).
>>
>> The 18-135mm has terrific zoom range, for which it trades off optical
>> performance.
>>
>> The 17-55mm is a wonderful lens and could be the right choice if you
>> need good low light performance. But it is expensive and double the
>> weight of the 18-55mm lens.
>>
>> There's a lot to be said for the 18-55mm kit lens because performance
>> is adequate, it is cheap, and it is very light... the best choice for
>> roaming around all day in interesting new places.
>>
>> So your friend should prioritize weight, reach, optical performance,
>> cost, and low light performance.

>
>Thanks
>
>I sort of know which lenses suit myself or wander out with a specific
>lens. I have used Nikon many years which enables me to suck up that
>information. lenses v's performance. My GP lens is the 24-120 has been
>for many years now.
>
>As for Canon they have so many lenses in the GP lens bracket I would not
>have the slightest, what to pick.


Well, the 24-120 is a 35mm format lens. For DX, it has no wide angle.
Might be suitable for you though if you don't use WA very often (or if
you use a FF camera).

I often go out with just the 100-400mm on the camera -- shooting birds
and butterflies.

Or I will have just the macro lens, to shoot bugs. All other lenses
stay home, because I know where I'm going and what I'll be shooting
there.

Just do some considering and match the lens to the job.

W
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rob
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-04-2012
On 4/07/2012 1:23 PM, Wally wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 12:31:55 +1000, Rob <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> On 4/07/2012 6:22 AM, Wally wrote:
>>> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 18:21:28 +1000, Rob <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Friend has a Canon 550D camera and would like to buy a new lens.
>>>>
>>>> Quote:
>>>>
>>>> "I'm thinking of buying a new all purpose lens. I feel my Canon EFS
>>>> 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens is not that great. I'm looking at the EFS
>>>> 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS USM (cheap > $340, maybe not much better than what I
>>>> already have) or EFS 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (dear > $600, large
>>>> diameter, very sharp, ). Also the EFS 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM which is
>>>> probably overkill for my EOS 550D - heavy and expensive lens > $860.
>>>>
>>>> Any recommendations?"
>>>
>>> Depends...
>>>
>>> The 15-85mm is excellent, but is heavy compared to the kit lens. Also,
>>> it is slow, and is expensive (but less if bought with a body).
>>>
>>> The 18-135mm has terrific zoom range, for which it trades off optical
>>> performance.
>>>
>>> The 17-55mm is a wonderful lens and could be the right choice if you
>>> need good low light performance. But it is expensive and double the
>>> weight of the 18-55mm lens.
>>>
>>> There's a lot to be said for the 18-55mm kit lens because performance
>>> is adequate, it is cheap, and it is very light... the best choice for
>>> roaming around all day in interesting new places.
>>>
>>> So your friend should prioritize weight, reach, optical performance,
>>> cost, and low light performance.

>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> I sort of know which lenses suit myself or wander out with a specific
>> lens. I have used Nikon many years which enables me to suck up that
>> information. lenses v's performance. My GP lens is the 24-120 has been
>> for many years now.
>>
>> As for Canon they have so many lenses in the GP lens bracket I would not
>> have the slightest, what to pick.

>
> Well, the 24-120 is a 35mm format lens. For DX, it has no wide angle.
> Might be suitable for you though if you don't use WA very often (or if
> you use a FF camera).
>


my only dx lens is a 12-24 just to cover wide angle, and there is a but
I stitch lots od images now.

But yes I have a FF camera body as well.

> I often go out with just the 100-400mm on the camera -- shooting birds
> and butterflies.
>
> Or I will have just the macro lens, to shoot bugs. All other lenses
> stay home, because I know where I'm going and what I'll be shooting
> there.
>
> Just do some considering and match the lens to the job.
>
> W
>


I think your right which I did mention just wander out with a specific
lens. Now hate to carry heaps of gear just in case.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon lenses are more versatile and better than Nikkors! =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?= Digital Photography 6 02-15-2007 10:02 AM
Build a Better Blair (like Build a Better Bush, only better) Kenny Computer Support 0 05-06-2005 04:50 AM
Canon 'L' Lenses V non 'L' Lenses Russell Digital Photography 5 04-30-2005 09:56 AM
Lenses for 20D. I have older ef lenses Robert Digital Photography 1 11-19-2004 12:42 AM
stabilizing lenses (what lenses to get w/10D) jonathan Digital Photography 4 10-06-2003 02:45 PM



Advertisments