Advice on Canon lenses for travel

strelleymagpie

strelleymagpie

Suspended / Banned
Messages
32
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys, I'm off to Wales for a fortnight and looking forward to taking lots of landscape pics and probably lots of pictures of castles too. My main camera is a Canon 40D (yes I know it's old, but I like it) and I'm stuck between a couple of lenses to get for my travels. My choice is between a Canon EF 17-40 L f/4 or a Canon EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM. My main concern is that the 17-40 is more of a full frame lens so not sure how much better it would be on the crop sensor of the 40D. Also, the 17-40 is twice the price of the 10-18 at MPB, so I don't want to be spending twice the money for very little improvement in image quality.

Why do I always leave these decisions till the last minute!!!

Advice would be appreciated, and possibly examples of picture quality?

edit. And just to throw a spanner in the works, I've just discovered the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM for about the same price as the 17-40
 
Last edited:
The 10-18 is considered and Ultra wide lens which has it's uses but useless as a walk about lens.

I would have a look at the 17-55 f2.8 which is a brilliant lens for the money.
 
I‘m still using my EF-S 15-85mm with either a 50D or 7DII as my walkabout. I’m not a landscape photographer, but I think it does a pretty decent job all round. IMG_0858.jpegGJW-Uluru.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Dare I suggest the Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0? Its a cracking lens, fairly cheap and does a decent macro as well as a usefull range.
 
strelleymagpie said:
My main camera is a Canon 40D (yes I know it's old, but I like it)...
Click to expand...
I liked my 40D but tastes change and I moved it on.

My current APS format cameras are Sony A65s, one of which is permanently fitted with the Sigma 10~20mm. It does everything I want of an ultrawide and is remarkably inexpensive.

Pedestrian steps from Western Way to Bridge Street Exeter A65 DSC03686.JPG
 
Back when I had Canon APS-C DSLR's I had a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. You can still find them on the used market. Sigma did a similar 18-50mm f2.8.

I remember taking a picture of my then GF with that lens on my 20D and thinking that a portrait of your GF can be too sharp :D
 
Either
Canon 17-55 f2.8
Canon 15-85
Sigma 17-70

I could not afford the 17-55 and the 15-85 was not out then or I would have had one of those so I got the Sigma 17-70, used it on a 400D, then a 40D then a 7D-great lens for the money, I only sold it when I went FF
 
My walkaround choices are a 24-120 on FF and an 18-135 on crop (1.5x rather than the Canon 1.6x). Given your chosen options, it'd be the 17-55/2.8.

Enjoy the trip!
 
are you stuck on only going for 17-55mm ? becouse I just looked and for the same price you can get a 18-150mm f/3.5-6.3 is stm which to my thinking would be way better, but thats just me I have the rf version for my r7 and its a great lens, not very big.
 
ADragon said:
are you stuck on only going for 17-55mm ? becouse I just looked and for the same price you can get a 18-150mm f/3.5-6.3 is stm which to my thinking would be way better, but thats just me I have the rf version for my r7 and its a great lens, not very big.
Click to expand...
I can't find an EF or EF-S version of that? Only EF-M or RF-S
 
17-55 2.8
Or the UWA (I had the sigma 10-20)

but they’re very different propositions.

And you’ll know more than us what you will use most.
 
I used to like the 17-40 on my 20D, but give the choice between the two, I would go for the 17-55 f2.8.
 
Another lens to consider - Canon EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM - would that be ok as a walk around travel lens?
 
That would be an ultra wide angle, like the 10-18 you mentioned in your original post.
 
10-22mm could be too wide for some as a walk around??

17-55mm has the edge on low light castle photography if handheld with f2.8 and 3 stop IS.
(Depending how and what you're after)

Both nice lenses, personally I'd grab the 17-55mm 2.8.

It's really a personal choice and depends on your style of shooting.
 
LeeRatters said:
I think the 17-55/2.8 IS is the one I'd go for in your situation.
Click to expand...
+1.
17-40 is pretty crap on FF, but if you are super lucky with perfect copy might be OK for a cropper.
I wouldn't spend big money on most things EF mount now, maybe with the exception of later Sigma ART primes and you will want a full frame body to match.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top