New walkabout Lens

MadFrankie

MadFrankie

Suspended / Banned
Messages
431
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
Yes
HI guys and gals,

I've got a Canon 60D and have just broken my everyday 17-85mm lens, (it got quickly acquainted with the floor from about 2m away), so I'm in the market for a replacement.

I want to upgrade a bit to something that will stay on my camera most of the time and for years to come, (floor acquainting apart), and have been looking about at the following:

Canon 17-55 (Not L)
Canon 17-40 (on a APC sensor?)
Canon 24-70 (bit high for the APC sensor?)
Canon 18-135 (too big for a walkabout?)
Canon 24-105 (how sharp is the 105 on a crop?)
Tamron 24-70 (QC issues?)

Anyone had real life experience with any of them, they are all in the same ball park in terms of price and all seem to get good reviews.

I take mostly landscapes and portraits / family shots on a walkabout...

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
What about the 24 - 105L. Can't beat that for what your looking to shoot.
 
BRASH said:
What about the 24 - 105L. Can't beat that for what your looking to shoot.
Click to expand...
Ah, forgot about that one, I'll add it to the OP. That might just be the lens I'm after, kind of a middle ground between range and value.

petersmart said:
If the crop doesn't make it too long at the wide end I'd recommend the 28-135mm IS USM - a really great lens at a good price especially if you can get one on here.
.
Click to expand...

On a crop I'm a little worried that 135 goes out to 216 and then it won't be overly sharp, have you got it on a crop body? How does it fair?
 
It depends what focal length you like to shoot at. If you don't shoot at 17-23mm and won't miss it, I'd say go for the 24-105mm or the 24-70 2.8 if you feel like splashing :)
 
On a crop body I think 24mm is too tight for lots of occassions, like landscapes. Why not the Canon 15-85 IS ? A very nice versatile walkabout.
 
gary43 said:
On a crop body I think 24mm is too tight for lots of occassions, like landscapes. Why not the Canon 15-85 IS ? A very nice versatile walkabout.
Click to expand...
Seconded. I had the 24-105 on my 50d and it wasn't wide enough, so I used to carry the 10-22 as well. On a full frame it's perfect.

For my sons 600d I got the 15-85 is and it's stunning lens
 
Byker28i said:
Seconded. I had the 24-105 on my 50d and it wasn't wide enough, so I used to carry the 10-22 as well. On a full frame it's perfect.

For my sons 600d I got the 15-85 is and it's stunning lens
Click to expand...

24mm on FF is wide . This equates to 38mm on a Canon crop if my maths works which isn't wide. I was never that knocked out by the 24-105 F4 L . It's not bad don't get me wrong but doesn't deserve L status in my opinion.
 
It also depends whether you're likely to want to upgrade to full frame in the future.

I have a 17-40 f/4L and it's a lovely lens for full-frame but also doubles as a very effective standard lens for APS-C cameras when I need that.

But if you're likely to stay with APS-C for a while I'd suggest the 15-85 or the 17-55 are your best options.
 
Cheers guys, interesting answers. While I've been happy with the 17-85 I want something a bit better. It's been a nice lens so far but the draw of a fixed focal length across the range is drawing me, as well as something that will last. I'm happy with my 60D so will be keeping with a crop for the foreseeable future.

I think a 55 is the lowest zoom I'd like for a walkabout as it's the flexibility I like.

Is the 15-85 much different from the 17-85?
 
having previously owned the 17-55mm 2.8 IS on a a 60d i can't recommend it enough its pretty much spot on for walking about, its sharp, F2.8 and had a good IS system to boot, if your happy sticking to crop long term def get one you won't be disappointed.
 
MadFrankie said:
On a crop I'm a little worried that 135 goes out to 216 and then it won't be overly sharp, have you got it on a crop body? How does it fair?
Click to expand...

The lens focal length never changes whatever body it's on - it's just the FOV (Field of view) which changes.

All camera crops are "standardised" to a FF camera with a sensor of 24x36mm.

So if you have the 135mm on your camera which is a 1.6 crop then on my camera (Canon 1Ds MKII) I would have to have a FL of 216mm to obtain the same FOV.

So the sharpness won't really change (excluding such esoteric concepts as circle of confusion) from camera to camera if using the same f no.

And the sharpness of the 28-135mm is very good.

In fact it's one of my favourite walkabout lenses.
.
 
Cheers, just been reading the various reviews of the 15-85, 17-85 and 17-55 and the 17-55 comes out top, it's just if I'll be happy with just the 55 length. I might thumb through my pics and see where I take photos. If it's mainly over the 55mm then I might plump for the 15-85, if not I really do like the 17-55 with the f2.8...
 
Tamron 17-50mm non VC. Previously had this as my Walkabout lens on my canon 60d.its very sharp and very cheap
 
Canon 24-05mm on a 50D
Same problem as eveyone else being wide @ 24mm but such a great lens I could live with that.
 
I love my 24-105 on full frame, not so much on crop.
I'd buy a tamron 17-50 VC.
 
gary43 said:
On a crop body I think 24mm is too tight for lots of occassions, like landscapes. Why not the Canon 15-85 IS ? A very nice versatile walkabout.
Click to expand...

Great lens and very good focal length range on crop body. Forget 24-105L or non L.
 
Boldonian said:
24mm on FF is wide . This equates to 38mm on a Canon crop if my maths works which isn't wide. I was never that knocked out by the 24-105 F4 L . It's not bad don't get me wrong but doesn't deserve L status in my opinion.
Click to expand...

24mm on full frame isn't really wide, I have a 14mm for that.
I think you must have had a poor copy of the 24-105. Mine is pin sharp throughout the range and I've images taken at 1/8th shutter speed hand held at night with the 50D. When I moved to my 5D mk3, I thought it would expose this lens but it's performed brilliantly, which is probably why it was provided as the kit lens for the 5D mk3. There's a certain sharpness and vibrancy with it that's hard to explain, which is probably why it's an L lens.

On full frame it's perfect as a walkabout lens, with a good, useful range, hence why we bought the 15-85 for my sons 600D. It wasn't cheap but its the same useful range (slightly better), image quality is great and the IS really helps in low light situations. The other lens I tried was the 24-70 f2.8, but at a third heavier it never worked for me. Great lens, the new mk2 is amazing, but at the time I went for the versatility of the 24-105. 526 reviews on FredMiranda and it still scores a 9. http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/295/sort/7/cat/27/page/1

A walkabout lens should be just that, useful in all situations, the one lens that stays on and is your grab camera and just go lens. For me, for a crop camera, it's the 15-85
 
Last edited:
Hi,

Thanks for the inputs, good food for thought.

I've been through a selection of my photos and checked the exif files and I seem to be generally using anything between 30mm and 85mm with around the 50mm being the mean. Surprised myself really as I'd have expected a much lower range and mean...

Perhaps a 24-105 might not be too bad...gives me another option to check the classifieds for!

Left with the 24-105 / 15-85 as my options I think.
 
My walkabout is the 24mm-105mm L IS on my 6D,it is hardly ever off my camera.:):banana:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top