Walkabout lens

K

keyrex

Suspended / Banned
Messages
41
Name
Michael
Edit My Images
No
What's the best walkabout lens?
I looked at the 17-40 f4.0 but its not good in low light situations and doesn't really have a big enough zoom range, I considered 24-105 but same thing with lack of low light capabilities. Ef-s 17-55 f2.8 is good but not suitable for full frame cameras (which, even though i dont have yet, i will be getting in early January 2013, so isnt an option) and 24-70 is way out of my price range, I thought about a prime but don't want to keep changing lenses for different or have too much walking to focus. What's your recommendations? Prices similar to the above mentioned lenses please.
 
24-70 F2.8 meets the bill, not sure anything else does

How often do you shoot in low light?
Do you really need 2.8 ?

The 17-40 and 24-105 are both excellent lenses....
 
If you are pretty sure about going FF soon, the 24-105L offers the best combnation of range, image quality, build and value for money for a walkabout lens. I never really got on with the 17-40mm as it always felt too short on a crop, let alone FF. 24-70 is nice but needs IS for the price Canon ask.

However, on a crop the 17-55 IS simply cannot be beaten.

24-105L can be found for £600 new at HDEW, or ~£520 for a decent used one.
 
Last edited:
I used a 24 - 105 L on my 50D and swapped lenses regulary.

A month ago, I got a FF 5D. This lens hasn't been off since!!
 
The ISO performance on the FF camera will make up for "only" being F4, so don't discount the 24-105L imo. Plus the only time light becomes an issue for a walkabout lens is in woodlands on an overcast day unless you intent to walk around at night instead?
 
If you really feel you need 2.8 then the Tamron 24-70 gets good reviews. Not used it but it also has VR.

Worth a stab if you can't stretch to the Canon ? £750 at DigitalRev.
 
Another vote here for the 24-105L. Its a good walk-around/travel lens for all the reasons listed above by other posters. I've had one for 6 years and used it on a 40D, 1D4 and 5D2. Walk-around implies outside, rather than low-light interiors, and if you need something for low-light either take a flash or a lightweight 1.8 or 1.4 50mm with you too.
 
you can't go very wrong with 24-105. Not excellent but pretty close. 17-40 will be quite wide on FF for general use, and not very sharp in the periphery to at least f/11 (but fine on crop)
 
For what it is worth I have a crop now with 17-55 and really like it. Next year I will be going full frame and will most likely be going with the new 24-70 mrk2. Yes I think it's odd not to have i.s. on a 2k+ lens but i'm not going to second guess Canon or the people that have tried it. According to them it falls right in line with the 70-200 2.8 mrk2 that I already have and love. My suggestion would be to buy the lens for the full frame or crop but not for both. 24 is no where wide enough for landscapes on a crop sensor but on a full frame it is. See the point?
 
Thanks for all the replies, looks like 24-105 gets the nod.

I did think that way but was a little concerned about how wide it is on crop but also thought I would have to,put with that in the short term until I get FF.
I've seen bad review about 17-40 being soft and not too good wide but not heard that about 24-105
Lets face it I'm no pro so when I shoot landscapes the extra 7mm probably won't even be noticeable.
I used to own a 17-85efs f4-5.6 that gave great landscapes but vignettes when used at 17mm so I had to use it 24mm to stop that so based on that I think 24-105 is the way to go.
Thanks again.
Ps. I'll be back for some advise on flashes soon too !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top