Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

Which walkabout lens?


Warriorpoet 6 213 3 England
13 Dec 2009 11:23PM
Hello all.

I currently have 3 lenses with my 40d

Sigma 10-20 (bought with camera)
Canon35mm f2 (make do walkabout)
Magic Drainpipe (ebay bargain I couldn't resist)

I have got to the point where I really need and can nearly afford to fill in the gap between the siggy and the 35mm and/or the siggy and the drainpipe.

I want to go full frame one day so I am looking at EF lenses, one to replace the sigma in time as FF wide angle and a walkabout.

I am looking at the 17-40 and the 24-70 Canon Ls.

The questions are which first? Or should I buy neither and keep saving given the rumours of the 24-70 IS (which will drive the price of the non IS down) and also the 12-24L EF that is rumoured that could replace the siggy straight off.

I am really only primarily interested in landscapes.

Any thoughts gratefully received.

Dave

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

cameracat 11 8.6k 61 Norfolk Island
13 Dec 2009 11:38PM
Primary interest landscapes = Canon 17-40 f/4 L.....Simples...Smile
strawman 11 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
13 Dec 2009 11:43PM
I use a 17-40 as my walk around lens and find it a good partner to the 10-20. I often find myself preferring wider angle lenses so it is a good standard lens for me.

I do not have the 24-70, but I do know it has an excellent reputation. so you could buy either.

Or you could get the 24-105.
Warriorpoet 6 213 3 England
13 Dec 2009 11:48PM
Thanks guys MPB seem to have a glut of 17-40s and if they drop the price again I think I will be unable to resist.

I might well go for the 105 as from what I can gather image quality is about the same as the 24-70 and the extra money is probably for the f2.8 which I wouldn't use anyway.
stevie e2
10 1.2k 2 United Kingdom
14 Dec 2009 7:17AM
The 24-105 is a very good 'walk around' lens which I've enjoyed using for a few years. I'm sure it would be a good partner to your 10-20 Sigma.
User_Removed 12 2.8k 11 United Kingdom
14 Dec 2009 7:21AM
Landscapes = 17-40
Walkabout = 24-105

Gerry.
mattw 11 5.2k 10 United Kingdom
14 Dec 2009 11:24AM
On a full frame camera, such as the 5D, I would choose the 24-105 as a 'walk around' lens (or 24-70, but that is getting a bit heavy).

For a crop camera such as the 40D, I would go with the 17-40 instead.
Warriorpoet 6 213 3 England
14 Dec 2009 4:35PM
Thanks all.

I am decided on the 17-40 first off. I use the 35mm quite a bit and I think the range between that and the sigma will be what I want most.
KathyW 11 1.8k 12 Norfolk Island
14 Dec 2009 5:26PM
I think you'd be happy with the 17-40, you may well find you won't be using the Sigma 10-20 much in the future Smile

Scuse my ignorance, but what is a magic drainpipe? The drain in my yard keeps overflowing - would a magic drainpipe be any help?
colin beeley e2
12 1.1k 10 England
14 Dec 2009 5:26PM
canon ef 28/300 L IS Wink
colin beeley e2
12 1.1k 10 England
14 Dec 2009 5:31PM
KathyW 11 1.8k 12 Norfolk Island
14 Dec 2009 5:36PM
Oh... wouldn't do much for my gutters then... Smile

28-300 L IS sounds interesting, also sounds rather heavy & expensive Sad
stevie e2
10 1.2k 2 United Kingdom
14 Dec 2009 6:00PM
I tried a 28-300 once - it's a bit of a compromise as you'd expect and the image quality is just not quite what I would call L-series, if you know what I mean. And its big and heavy, although it does cover a large range.
NeilS e2
7 936 United Kingdom
14 Dec 2009 6:25PM
Have you considered the light cheap/fast autofocusing as well as fast aperture 85mm 1.8 or 100mm f2 prime they would be hard to beat for something slightly longer which you may need on full frame.

Alternatively the 24-105 if its wide enough for your landscape and perhaps a 135 f2, which with a 1.4x TC could make your magic drainpipe redundant.
Warriorpoet 6 213 3 England
15 Dec 2009 12:13AM
Kathy

The drainpipe is the 80-200 2.8L forerunner to the various 70-200Ls.

I got mine for less that the 70-200L F4 Smile

Neil

I think the 24-105 will be on my shopping list somewhere down the line.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.