450D kit lens upgrade

hashcake

hashcake

Gone to pot!
Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,943
Name
Darran, Daz or ****
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm thinking of replacing my 450D 18-55mm IS kit lens with the Canon 17-85mm IS USM lens.
I had a play with one yesterday and I was very impressed with it.
Do you think it would be a worthy upgrade?
 
Hi, I'm not sure it's really worth £300 or so to duplicate a lot of the kit lens range, particularly as the kit lens is quite well regarded anyway.

I'd be more inclined to either get a couple of primes (50mm and 85mm perhaps) or get something to extend your range a lot more, like the 70-200 F4L which Kerso have for about £350 :thumbs:
 
I had the 17-85 when I bought my first 40D in a kit.

TBH I wasn't that impressed with it. Yes, the lens is an improvement on the 18-55, but IMHO not enough to justify the cost. CA, pincushion and barrel distortion were very evident on the lens I had and traded it in part exchange for a 70-200mm f4L.

I'd be more inclined to keep the kit lens and get your first L lens as jj pearce suggests or perhaps if you really want the 17-85mm range or near enough, go for the Sigma 24-60mm. A chap on here (Andy - Puddleduck) highly recommends it on a different thread..

Cheers, Mark
 
Get a Sigma 17-70mm - that's the upgrade I've just made, and have not regretted it one bit!! :D
 
Hmm, now you've got me thinking!
I've also got a nifty fifty and I'm happy with that as a prime lens and I've got a canon 50-250mm IS lens.
I was basically thinking of a general walkabout lens and I thought the 17-85mm would be a better option for our holiday than the 18-55mm kit lens.

The 17-85mm lens I played with belongs to my stepdaughters hubby and he got it with his 40D.
I only had a little time to play with it indoors and it certainly seemed to improve over the 18-55mm.
I prefer IS lenses as camera shake can be a real pain for me, hence the reason I currently stick with with canon lenses but hopefully this will improve over time.

You've given me food for thought, think I will consider this for a bit longer.
 
But the Sigma 17-70 is a 2.8 lens which means you can hand hold at faster shutter speeds than the kit lens?
 
I upgraded my 18-55 400d kit lens to the 17-85, and loved it. Yes it is a bit slow, but the stablizier more than makes up for that with me. My only upset was when i dropped it :'( however shes being fixed now so should be fighting fit again!

The siggy 17-70 seemed to slow and loud for me when focusing, and thats what put me off. The Sigma 24-60 is a good lens from what i have seen, but it may not be wide enough on a crop body.
 
I was doing the same upgrade pretty much - I wanted better than the standard 18-55mm that came with my 30D.

I tried the the 17-85 IS and was impressed, but I also tried the Sigma 17-70 (f/2.8-4.5) and the Tamron 17-50 (f/2.8).

I eventually settled on the Tamron, sold by the f/2.8. The larger aperture size allowing for faster shutter speed made up for the IS in my opinion, and also reduces motion blur, which the IS cannot.

Just waiting for it to arrive tomorrow :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top