Best Canon standard Zoom

L

Lunawolfy

Suspended / Banned
Messages
130
Name
Sean
Edit My Images
No
Hey all, new here :thumbs:

Basically I came here from another forum (unsure if mentioning is allowed in rules) as I feel I need more advice.

I'm off on holiday to Centerparcs come the end of May and I really need a new lens, I had a 400D, sidegraded to a 40D and sold the 400D + Kit lens to my parents, leaving my only my nifty fifty and a Sigma 70-300.

Now for the most of it I was considering the Canon 17-85 IS USM as it's essentially a beefed up kit lens, which would give me a nice wide end, decent zoom range and IS (which I've never used before however I can assume it would make the lens half decent indoors)

However I keep coming across all these horror stories of the 17-85's breaking after warranty expires, something about a screw locks your zoom ring?

Now people have suggested other lenses to me (15-85 and 17-55f2.8) however these are out of my budget, and somewhat embarrassingly I have very little knowledge of 3rd party lenses, tamron especially I have zero understand of the acronyms used in the lens titles.

Any light you can shed on this would be greatly appreciated :)
 
artyman said:
Best walkround on a crop camera is Canon 15-85, good range and excellent IQ
Click to expand...

Not very useful considering the OP said he doesn't have a budget for the 17-55 F2.8 or the 15-85.

I have a Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC Macro. There are many versions of this lens but the Macro version is the best version, except for the latest OS version (which is out of your budget). The acronyms for these are fairly simple when you get to know them:
EX = Excellence (like Canon's L range)
DC = Digital Crop (Like Canon's EF-S)
Macro = Short focusing
OS = Optical Stabalization (like Canon's IS).

There is also the Tamron 17-50mm which also gets good reviews here.
 
Has the OP considered going 2nd hand? you'll get more lens for your $$$, but it does depend on what the OPs budget is?
 
pete.rush said:
Has the OP considered going 2nd hand? you'll get more lens for your $$$, but it does depend on what the OPs budget is?
Click to expand...

Ideally not breaking £400. I'd prefer to spend in the £300 region.

I didn't realise that's what the EX meant on Sigmas. Anybody got a guide to Tamrons?

I'd love to go second had however I can't get on the MM here and I don't really trust 'Ol fleabay
 
Lunawolfy said:
Ideally not breaking £400. I'd prefer to spend in the £300 region.

I didn't realise that's what the EX meant on Sigmas. Anybody got a guide to Tamrons?

I'd love to go second had however I can't get on the MM here and I don't really trust 'Ol fleabay
Click to expand...

Sell ur sigma too and get the 15-85 at hdewcameras. I got mine from there £450
 
Tamron do 2 standard zooms in your price range.
The 17-50mm f2.8 non VC and the same lens with VC.

Both are good lenses with great optics (early versions of the VC model can be ropey but Tamron sorted that out in the updated release)

Both have inner focus unlike its canon equivalent the 18-55mm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
stupar said:
Tamron do 2 standard zooms in your price range.
The 17-50mm f2.8 non VC and the same lens with VC.

Both are good lenses with great optics (early versions of the VC model can be ropey but Tamron sorted that out in the updated release)
Click to expand...

How would I go about getting a non ropey one?
 
Lunawolfy said:
How would I go about getting a non ropey one?
Click to expand...

Test it if you can or see test shots of it wide open and closed down.
I believe the older VC models had a tendency to not be as sharp as their non VC counterparts.

I use a non VC at present and to be honest lack of image stability has never been a problem.
 
Lunawolfy said:
True.

At f2.8 I'm sure it's far from unusable indoors :p
Click to expand...

Lens works fine indoors if plenty light, in low light a flashgun helps it out otherwise it will hunt around slightly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've just bought the Canon 15-85 2nd hand for significantly less than £400. Might need to shop around though.

(New ones can be had from Panamoz for £439)
 
Can't go wrong with a Tamron 17-50 2.8 non-VC for the price. No complaints at all with mine.
 
Have a look at MPB Photography, they have a very good selection of second hand lenses at reasonable prices and are regularly mentioned on the forum, and advertised at the top of the page. Good service from them, I've bought a couple of lenses from them.
 
6 months warranty I believe.
I can highly recommend them having used them to sell lenses to.
 
Hi

I've a 17-85 and it's a great lens and worth a look at. The new 15-85 gets good reviews aswell as you can see in previous posts and if you can find one 2nd hand one all the better.

As others have suggested, you also have the Sigma and Tamron ranges.
 
andyred said:
Hi

I've a 17-85 and it's a great lens and worth a look at. The new 15-85 gets good reviews aswell as you can see in previous posts and if you can find one 2nd hand one all the better.

As others have suggested, you also have the Sigma and Tamron ranges.
Click to expand...

Has yours suffered from this Zoom Lock issue?
 
I had a 17-85 that came with my 50d, worked OK but I never liked the image quality ( not much better than the kit lens) so I sold it and bought a Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD IF which was a real bargain of a lens, really sharp and f2.8 aperture throughout the zoom range, much better than my 17-85, no IS but do you really need it on a wide zoom? I sold it after a couple of years still working perfectly for about £200 only because I bought a full frame camera.
 
The 17-85 suffers three common faults, one is the screw that comes loose affecting the zoom, another is the aperture unit ribbon cable which flexes and cracks causing the lens to hunt for focus and generating an err01 or err99 fault depending on which body it's on and the 3rd is they're prone to sucking in dust (as do many other lenses, including high-end ones).
All can be fixed fairly easily, though dust isn't too much of an issue if it's just the odd few small specks.
Image quality is more than acceptable considering it's still a pretty low cost lens.
I bought a faulty one from the classifieds on here, fitted a brand new aperture unit complete with ribbon cable and it pretty much lives on my 40d. ;)
 
Lunawolfy said:
Has yours suffered from this Zoom Lock issue?
Click to expand...

No no issues (touch wood).

I've heard very mixed reviews about the Tamron lens - it can be hit and miss over the quality of the lens, if you do get a good one, then people race about it, but can take a few attempts to get one.
 
The right advice here is to not rush out and buy a cheap lens because of the price, rather than to decide what lens you want and save for it. It's much cheaper in the long run and leads to better results.

How about borrowing the kit lens back for the holiday?
 
Byker28i said:
The right advice here is to not rush out and buy a cheap lens because of the price, rather than to decide what lens you want and save for it. It's much cheaper in the long run and leads to better results.

How about borrowing the kit lens back for the holiday?
Click to expand...

I know I can't justify/afford something spectacular, Like the 17-55 f2.8 IS USM. That's just not in my budget, the absolute highest I could save for would probably be a 2nd hand 17-40L.

Worst case I will get the kit lens back, but it seriously sucks XD
 
Have you considered the Canon 18-135?
I've not tried one but apparently it's a cracking lens for the money, you can pick used ones up for around £180 and they're only about £250 new.
I haven't seen any negative reviews on them regarding reliability issues and the image quality is supposed to be very good.

Just out of interest, what kit lens is it, the non IS or the IS?
I've had both and tbh, the non IS one is awful but (other than the noisy focus motor) the IS one is pretty good.
Image quality between the two is a world apart and the IS works superbly.
I have a MkII IS and was going to sell it on after getting the 17-85 but I have a Raynox macro adapter and it works far better on the 18-55 than it does on the 17-85 so I'm now keeping hold of it.
 
Ugh! :(
Seriously, if you want something cheap and usable to fill in while you save for 'the keeper' then an 18-55 IS is pretty good considering you can pick one up for around £50 and you'll get your money back when you sell it on after getting the one you really want. :thumbs:
The difference between the IS and non IS really is chalk and cheese.
The image quality on the MkII is the same as the MkI but it has a better IS system (apparently) and slight cosmetic changes. :thumbs:
 
I don't really feel like I should make the jump to high end glass when I use a 2nd hand 40D, although it was mint with less than 100 actuations :P

Plus when I extend to expensive glass, thats when the cheap body will die and I'll want to buy an expensive one :P
 
Lunawolfy said:
I don't really feel like I should make the jump to high end glass when I use a 2nd hand 40D, although it was mint with less than 100 actuations :P

Plus when I extend to expensive glass, thats when the cheap body will die and I'll want to buy an expensive one :P
Click to expand...

The 40D is a great body, it may have been inexpensive to buy, but I certainly wouldn't call it a cheap body and decent glass makes a difference to any body !
 
andyred said:
The 40D is a great body, it may have been inexpensive to buy, but I certainly wouldn't call it a cheap body and decent glass makes a difference to any body !
Click to expand...

It was a bloody steal!

Guy wanted a decent price for it, put in a super low offer for the 'lulz' and he took it!

Must a needed money, made me feel like a jerk :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top