kit lens replacement - usual sort of query

davidjpope1

davidjpope1

Suspended / Banned
Messages
100
Edit My Images
No
Hi

I appreciate this is something that people are always asking for advice on but I guess everyone has slightly different needs / budgets, so here is my conundrum.

I currently have a canon 18-55 IS kit lens. I want to keep the wide capability so am considering 3 options.

Cheapest

Canon 17-85 IS

Next cheapest

Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC

Least Cheap

Canon 15-85 IS

My question will I be dissapointed by the 17-85 in comparison to the 15-85 or would I not notice too much of a drop off in quality baring in mind how much cheaper it is.

Then with the tamron would I appreciate the 2.8 more than the additional reach of the others.

Probably waffled on a bit there but any thoughts would be welcome.
 
Image quality wise, the 17-85 is not much, if any, better than the 18-55 IS, the only advantages with it is that it gives you more reach, a tiny bit extra on the wide end, a proper Ultrasonic focus motor and full-time manual focus.
It's my current weapon of choice and I do like it but I will be replacing it with something better at some point.
Tbh, if the 17-50 and 15-85 are both on your list of possibles then I'd strike the 17-85 off it and get one of those two.
Which one? That I can't advise you on as I've not used either but when I do upgrade I'll probably get the 15-85 as I feel it would be the better of the two to use as an everyday 'walkabout' lens purely because of the extra range. ;)
 
I was in a similar situation recently (last week in fact) and i went from a kit 18-70mm 3.5-4.5 to a Tamron 17-50 2.8 (on a Nikon body)

One think i do not miss is the reach, and i am loving the wide aperture all through the range, so a +1 for the 17-50
 
I'd throw the Sigma 17-50 f2.8 into consideration too, I upgraded to that from the Canon 17-85 and it is hugely better and reasonably priced for its quality (though costs a bit more than the Tamron). Might be worth keeping an eye out for used. Cheers G
 
Thanks for that guys. I do like the sound of the 15-85 for the extra reach but the price and f2.8 of the tamron are very attractive. I will look onto the sigma
 
I have the Tamron which I picked up second hand to replace my kit lens and love its low light and DOF capabilities. It depends what sort of photography you are mainly going to do. If you think you will need the reach but not the speed the go for the other one.

J
 
You also have Tokina 16-50 f2.8 which I'm sure is every bit as good as the tamron but with better build quality.

I haven't used it but would definitely look into it if I weren't in such of a hurry to buy a fast normal zoom (went with the tamron).
 
rpsmith79 said:
I was in a similar situation recently (last week in fact) and i went from a kit 18-70mm 3.5-4.5 to a Tamron 17-50 2.8 (on a Nikon body)
Click to expand...

That Nikon 18-70 is quite a good lens (I assume you mean the AF-S version).

However, that f2.8 aperture is quite an improvement.


Steve.
 
i'm using the tamron 17-50 f2.8 non vc version , and thats pretty good , and i havent missed the IS - unless you've got very shaky hands you don't really need it on a short lens in most circumstances
 
Jimi-the-fish said:
I have the Tamron which I picked up second hand to replace my kit lens and love its low light and DOF capabilities. It depends what sort of photography you are mainly going to do. If you think you will need the reach but not the speed the go for the other one.

J
Click to expand...


I do have a Tamron 70-300 VC so do have the reach if I want it. It is just nice not to have to change lens quite so often.

I can get the Tamron about £150 cheaper than the Canon 15-85 so maybe I should just be less lazy!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top