swedguy

I need a good allround travel lens for my Canon EOS 400D. I'm not a great photographer or anything, I just love to take pictures and want to improve

These are the ones I've looked at so far:

Canon EF 50 f/1.8 II
Sigma 28 f/1.8 EX DG Macro
Get one of those for indoor and low-light conditions.

CANON EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
CANON EF-S 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS USM (Got decent reviews and covers pretty much all you need for travelling. But 4-5,6?)
CANON EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM (loved it when I tried it, but costs a little bit too much)
SIGMA 24-70 f/2.8 DG Macro EX (Good reviews and good price)
Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 AF DI XR SP (Seems like a great lens)
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Di II LD (Might be a little short with 50)

Why I'm leaning towards the Canon's is the IS, since my hands are not the most steady ones ;)
But the two Tamron's and the Sigma have 2.8.

Please give me any input you might have

AaronM

As an everyday lens, you probably won't use 2.8 anyway and IS is a waste of money for small lenses, IMHO.

I would never buy a Tamron lens but Sigma does make a decent product. Personally, I'd stick with non IS Canon if I were you.

Star 69

Choose this CANON EF-S 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS USM really good lens across you mentioned in your list. Price is not cheap but great quality.

__________________
e-mail star69

Lifer

Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM

Less is useless in my opinion.

Like the 100 Macro - can do portrait as well

Look here: http://www.usa.canon.com/app/pdf/lens/EFLensChart.pdf

swedguy

A 3.2 lbs travel lens that is twice as long as the 17-85?


Aaron,
Why never Tamron? They've won best consumer lens for quite a few years, they must be doing something right. Have in mind that I'm no pro, just a happy amateur
One thing I like with the Sigma is the price. You can get two for the price of one of the Canon's.

Star 69,
I've been leaning towards that one for some time, but then I take a look at the other and jumps back and forth. Thanks for your input.

AaronM

I used to work for a camera store. Nothing but problems and complaints about Tamron products. They may have changed but my opinion is set now. Sigma has always been a strong lens. If I was not using Canon Lenses then Sigma would be the only other brand I would personally consider.

stag44

I bought a Tamron AF 18-200 Di II f3.5 - 6.3 about this time last year to go travelling with, so I could leave my good lenses at home and not have to carry around a large camera bag.... If its just holiday pictures you want to take this is really the only lens you need... its performance is quite good, and I was pleased with the results.... Its a small and light lens and will go well with your 400D.....

__________________

Lifer

Yes, it is heavy, but the 400 already has a heavier body than a little cigerette pack sized camera. Not to use a decent lense on a camera that is not cheap seems to be a little bit of a waste.

@AaronM - I compared a few sigmas and canons side by side and found that the biggest difference was lighting. Did a test outside, on a tripod and just changed out the lense.... and the Sigmas made darker images. Some say the glass in some canon models is the key as well.

I'm no expert - I just use them... but I really tried to get the info on them before buying give the prices. Personally, I decided to stick 100% with Canon... even though they are way more expensive. I paid more... maybe too much... but I never had second thoughts about the quality.

swedguy

Hmmm, too many choices!

Sebastian Sands

Aaron what camera do you shoot with?

I just upgraded my rebel Xt to a 5D. a whol enew world, Plus had to replace some lenses as well, since the 5D won't take EFS lenses.

Sebastian

Juilan

I have the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 it's a pretty good all purpose lens.

__________________
My Best Converting VOD Sponsor |

Altheon

If I had to choose one lens for multi purpose shooting I'd use the 24-70 f2.8L . It doesn't have IS but shooting at f2.8 with a high iso plus flash will get you through pretty demanding low light stuff.

The 70-200 f2.8L IS is also a great lens. I use that one a lot as well but it takes the auto focus a long time to lock on in low light plus it's as heavy as a tank.

As a rule of thumb if you are going to splurge on anything it should be the lens. You can't go wrong with the "L" series but they do cost an arm and a leg.

-A

swedguy

I'm torn here. Later on I will buy more lenses, so sticking to one brand is pretty much required. I don't want to have 2-3 hoods, 2-3 of this and 2-3 of that.

I'm down to 3 right now, of course 1 of each brand

Canon EF-S 17-85/4,0-5,6 IS USM
Sigma EX 24-70/2,8 DG Macro (it's heavy and large to the point that it blocks the flash according to some tests)
Tamron AF SP 28-75/2,8 XR Di LD (Sorry Aaron, had to put it on the list since people are saying that it's better than the Sigma)

I've pretty much ruled out IS as a main factor to choose lens from. But if it has it, it's a bonus.
I would like to stick to all Canon, since they have other lenses that I will most likely get later on.

The Sigma and Tamron are both 2.8 and I really like playing with depths in pictures.
But I could get the Canon 17-85 f/4-5.6 and use a 50 f/1.8 for those moments instead, if the Canon is that much better and for the sake of sticking to one lens maker.

What's your thoughts?

tony286

the canon 50mm 1.8 is a amazing lens for the price. I have the sigma and havent gotten around to selling it since I got the 24-70L .It is a very good lens just bulky.

NemesiS876

CANON is my advice

AaronM

Canon 20D and 5D.

Canon 24-70 f2.8
Canon 70-200 f2.8

AaronM

My primary choice is the 5D with the 24-70 lens. I carry other lenses with me but rarely use them.

Here's a shot of the 20D and some other stuff. Yes, the lenses I use are bulky but then again, so are the cameras and a lot of the other gear I travel with.



Imagine what a pain in the ass it is to pack this son of a bitch around.

AaronM

Just for clarification....I'm referring to the lens, not me.

DeanCapture

MMMmmmm - sexy

__________________
Twitter: @DeanCapture
Instagram: @TheDeanCapture
DeanCapture "at" Gmail.com

jMEGA

I'm a Canon owner myself. I have a 20D. I would go with the Tamron 28-75.
BTW what lenses do you own now?

__________________
Design | SEO | Photo / Video Editing
( ICQ 49354667 )

tony286

What case is that? it would be perfect for when I go on the road

AaronM

It's a Pelican. I forget which model but I can check for you tomorrow.

I think it's this one with a different divider.

http://www.pelican-case.com/1660.html

tony286

thank you

rowan

I put a 16-35mmL onto my 350D and it felt very front heavy. Attaching a 580EX flash for a laugh was even more dramatic: I could no longer hold the camera with one hand comfortably.

Scaling up, the 70-200mm f2.8 IS is more than 2.5 times the weight of the 16-35mmL... in other words, it is completely impractical on such a light and small body.

Given that the original poster said the 24-105 is too expensive I doubt he'd be considering the 70-200mm f2.8 IS anyway. OVERKILL!!

stag44

I'd personally never EVER buy an EF-S lens........... they're a long term false economy - as if you develop your interest in photography then the likelyhood is you'll progress to a full frame camera - like the 5d, which of course cant use EF-S lenses.......

For travelling you will find the 24-70 and 28-75 a little short.... unless you plan to take all you pics in RAW and then use photoshop to crop and bring things nearer

__________________

swedguy

None so far. That's why I am very confused ;)

I was in Thailand for a month and got back some weeks ago. There were so many cool street scenes and other great objects that I just wanted to get on film. Only thing I had with me was a P&S and sure I get it on film, but it lacks the... bite and kick. All you get is a flat picture no matter what you do.

I'm going back there again in 2 weeks for 1.5 months, so I will have plenty of time to shoot and experiment. But this time I want something real with me

swedguy

Thank you for the tip about EF-S, I did not think about that

Is there anything else you would recommend?

AaronM

I'm headed to Thailand at the end of January. Trying to decide if I should pack a 300mm or 600mm along for the trip. Any suggestions on that?

latinasojourn

i use the 24-105 f/4L on a 5D about 90% of the time, this combo with IS is superb in low light at slow shutter speeds and because the lens is not f/2.8 it is light enough to carry around all day for sight-seeing.

some vignetting but on less than full-frame body this should not be a prob.

IMO canon IS works better than nikon VR.

stag44

Fuck - i'm off to thailand on 1st feb looks like everyone on this thread is going there..... can i borrow yr 300mm?????

As for what to take.... depending on what lens you have, you could consider taking the 300 and a X2 extender.....

__________________

abyss_al

canon efs 17-85

__________________
EMAIL: allen @ vasmediagroup.com | ICQ: 311329761 | SKYPE: abyss.al | AIM: xABYSSxALx

jwhores

Make sure its 10 MP minimum. Noone likes noise.

swedguy

Depends.
If you are going to shoot katoeys at Nana, bring the 18mm since they are in your face.
If you are going to shoot humping monkeys at Erawan, bring the 300 ;)

swedguy

Interesting. What do you mostly take pictures of?

studiocritic

My only tips.. don't buy an EF-S lens, you won't be able to use it on a full-frame (5d, etc) Canon.

Also, your 400D has a 1.4x FOV crop factor.

This means the effective length of all of those lenses needs to be multiplied by 1.4.

a 24-70 becomes approximately a 34-98, and etc.

Keep that in mind. For a single carry lens, in my opinion, 34mm is not wide enough.

The 17-40 L (F/4) makes a great carry lens, but it does not go long enough for a lot of shots.

I just rented the Sigma 18-200 3.5-6.3 so I could give it a try. I haven't got to take any pics yet though, I'll post a comparison when I've had time.

I certainly don't expect it to produce the quality of images that I've come to appreciate from the 17-40 L, but it has a very nice range on it and it's very small and lightweight.

You also might want to look into the 24-105 L, it's an f/4 lens with IS.

__________________

studiocritic

If that is the f/2.8 (the 300), I'd take the 300mm and a 2x teleconverter.

You can get the Canon 2.0x TC from rentglass.com for a few bucks a week if you don't want to waste the money on one.

__________________

tony286

Aaron who do you use for insurance for your camera stuff, I been fucking around and I have to get some.

studiocritic

check out ziplens, rentglass, etc.. you can rent a bunch of lenses and see what you like, before you invest several thousand in a kit you won't enjoy.

__________________

swedguy

The FOV crop is 1.6 on the 400D, but close enough
Unfortunately I live in Sweden, so no cheap lens rentals around here.

Now there has been quite a few that has suggested the 24-105 f/4L. What's so great about it?
Why is it better than a Sigma/Tamron 24-70 f/2.8?

Just want to know if it's THAT much better, since I can get 3 Sigma/Tamron 24-70 for the price of 1 Canon 24-105.

ToplistBlog_Com

All products of Canon is best of others !!!

swedguy

If I am going to get a new 24-105 f/4L, I might as well go for a used 24-70 f/2.8 that will be ~$100 cheaper? Or?

Hell Puppy

Nice case with that Pelican. Do you actually check that bad boy when going on a long trip or how are you movng that gear?

That's always been an issue for me, I tend to prune down to what I can get in carry-on and inevitably end up wishing I had a couple of pieces with me that are left at home.

Insurance or not, I've never had the balls to check a case full of camera and video gear.

Red Ezra

hands down 24-70 mm 2.8ƒ

rowan

More megapixels does not equal less noise, in fact is it often quite the opposite. Cramming more pixels in means each sensor site is smaller and more susceptible to noise.

swedguy

morning hump

swedguy

Bump...

swedguy

I decided to go all Canon

The 24-70 f/2.8 seemed like the best choice, especially with its 2.8 and great optics. But the price was a bit steep and it's quite heavy.

If I went with Sigma or Tamron, I could get a lot more lenses for my money. But sometimes I am a brand whore and it feels a lot better to have Canon on Canon. Then I know that everything works together, is made for each other and is of good quality

I finally went with the Canon EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM. When I tried it, it was great and didn't feel very heavy. Could walk around with it all day. I will also take a lot of pics from my kayak and I think the IS will come in quite handy there.

I will also get a Canon EF 50 f/1.8 II.

I think it will be a good start. Thank you for all your help

rowan

I recently bought the 70-200mm f4L IS and I'm loving the IS. That means the 24-105 f4L IS automatically moves onto my wishlist. :D

Joe_Blow

I love mine. My next lens is this: CANON EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM

Once you go L, you will NEVER go back.

__________________
ICQ for bulk deals
http://www.faproductions.com

ICQ: 151177714

Star 69

That's a great lens

__________________
e-mail star69