Canon 400D user - Need advice on a new lens

tom_amateur

tom_amateur

Suspended / Banned
Messages
119
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
Canon 400D user

I currently have:

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro
Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6



I'm now looking at getting one of these:

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L USM

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM


After experiencing F/2.8 I'm really tempted by those. I can afford one at that price. However I wondering if a) a 400D will take advantage of that, and b) if getting both a wide angle and a walk around at f/4 would be better, or c) getting one at f/4 then making a saving effort for a new body, or d) getting a new body now.

I'm not sure if I can get a real upgrade from the 400D for say £400, my friend said I should get a 70D, but that would be in lieu of a new lens.
 
Those lenses are designed as wide angle and ultra wide angle lenses for full frame bodies. They'll still produce lovely images on the 400d but you're paying for a lot of glass the 400d will crop out.

Why not consider the Canon efs 17-55 IS f/2.8?
 
Hi Jim,

Thank you for your reply. I've been doing some reading and you're right. Most L lenses won't be fully appreciated on cropped frame.

That is a nice lens that you've recommended. I guess I would see even more improvement if I got a 700D upgrade to go with it?

I'm also leaning towards the 70D with the 18-135mm IS STM lens.

I can budget £1,000 for an upgrade.
 
The 70d is a lovely camera but I think in terms of general image quality, the lens is the way to go.

The 70d has many other advantages though, such as build, better sensor and processor, faster FPS etc etc.

I guess it depends where your priorities lay?

Or perhaps the best of both worlds, a 70d with a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8? Some regard this as equal to the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 with regards to image quality but it costs a lot less.
 
Many thanks for your feedback again, Jim.

I'll be going to Europe for three months for work, and I enjoy photographing architecture, landscapes, but don't want to be stuck in wide angles.

I think the 7D with the Tamron 17-50 would be great for this. Good advice there, it scores very highly against the Canon, and for £200-300 less.

But how would it compare to the Canon 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, which I could get with the 70D for a very similar price.
 
tom_amateur said:
Many thanks for your feedback again, Jim.

I'll be going to Europe for three months for work, and I enjoy photographing architecture, landscapes, but don't want to be stuck in wide angles.

I think the 7D with the Tamron 17-50 would be great for this. Good advice there, it scores very highly against the Canon, and for £200-300 less.

But how would it compare to the Canon 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, which I could get with the 70D for a very similar price.
Click to expand...
I have the 18-135 IS and while its a very good lens with IS and great range, the Tamron 17-50 and Canon 17-55 f/2.8 lenses have it beaten for image quality. A compromise between the short, better quality lenses and the longer lens with no so good IQ (though still pretty decent) might be the EFS 15-85? Its not cheap but its a good mix of great image quality and range.

My 18-135 IS is my general purpose lens for my cropped bodies (or it was until something came loose inside and jammed the aperture blades!).
 
Last edited:
I'd agree with Jim

The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS would be my weapon of choice on a 1.6 crop body.

If you value a little extra reach over the f2.8 then another to consider is the EF-S 15-85 mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
 
Second the opinion on the 16-35mm. It's a waste on a crop camera (though if you plan to go FF in future, will carry you through); I'd also venture that for majority of uses, f/2.8 on a 16-35mm is largely a waste, even on a Full Frame. If I bought my 16-35mm 2.8 II again, I'd buy an F4 :) If you do go for ultra-wide on a crop, you can't really go wrong with the Canon 10-22mm Great lens, and relatively good prices used too. I was always planning to go FF eventually, so never bought any other EF-S lenses than the 10-22mm, which made it easier to transition as I had the 24-70 2.8, and 70-200 already covered. If you plan to stay on a crop, then the 24-70 is not as flexible as the EF-S lenses mentioned.
 
Thank you all for your input.

I've given the camera body a lot of thought also, and I think upgrading to a 700D isn't worth it for £400, and the 70D doesn't give me much more for £700. I'm not interested in video, and I don't photograph motorsports or fast moving animals so the better AF on the 70D won't help me much, so I think my 400D can carry me for awhile longer.

I think full frame bodies will be out of my price range for a long time, so the EF-S lenses won't be a problem for me.

I think I will settle with the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. It is in the range I want and will eclipse the Canon EF 28-105mm 1:3.5-4.5 I have currently.

I can then look at getting a 70-200mm if I find I want the extra reach, or that 10-22mm Simes mentioned if I want a wider angle. Not buying a new camera body means I have £500 "spare" to put towards another lens in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top