which lens for a canon 30d?

[prair]

i’m in the market for a new lens for my canon 30d. right now i’m using the 18-55mm kit lens, so i know anything will be a step up, but i’m torn between 3 lenses.

1. tamron 28-75 f2.8
2. canon 17-85mm f4-5.6
3. canon 28-135mm f3.5-5.6

the tamron is less spendy and i’ve heard good things about it, and the f2.8 would be nice. but i’ve heard really good things about the canon image stabilizer feature. i’m not really that sold on the wide-angle-ness of the canon 17-85 (when i need a wide-angle, i’ll get a different lens), so if there’s one lens that could be eliminated, it would be that one.

i guess my question is should i go for the IS or the f2.8? is there that much difference between the f2.8 & f3.5? and are the IS and extra zoom worth the extra $60 or so i would spend on the canon?

i mostly take close-ups of flowers, and a lot of walk-around random people/places pics.

[Analogy]

f/2.8 all the way. When it’s low-light and you want to zoom in at all with either of those Canon lenses, the f/5.6 is going to kill you. At these focal lengths IS doesn’t really make that much of a difference anyway because at the shutter speeds where IS actually makes a difference, there will be too much subject movement to get sharp shots anyway.

[prair]

that’s what i was leaning toward – i just needed a second opinion.

thanks!

[Elsinore]

I have the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 and it’s an awesome lens. That f/2.8 definitely comes in handy.

[RcMacStudent]

I have the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 and it’s an awesome lens. That f/2.8 definitely comes in handy.

Hey! That’s exactly what I was gonna say. 😀
It’s also pretty sweet on my Canon A2 (film) body where it actually ventures into wide angle territory.

[U-Man]

When I bought my 20D six years ago, I deleted the 18-55 and got the 17-85 IS. Overall, I’ve been really happy with it. For daytime pics and snapshots it is great. Compared to the others you listed, I would miss the wider angle the the 17-85 provides. That said, as I get into photography more, the f4-5.6 can get in the way.

I think that I would trust the other opinions here over mine. They know way more ’bout this stuff than I do.

/but I would still miss that extra wideness….

[Elsinore]

Tamron has a 17-50mm f/2.8 that’s said to be as excellent optically as their 28-75 f/2.8. With the 17-50mm range, it’s a standard zoom for a 1.6 crop body (equivalent to 27mm-80mm in full frame 35mm, or slightly wide to slightly telephoto). Of course, it doesn’t have the range of the Canon 17-85mm, but it’s an option with great low light capability. Only other drawback to the Tamron would be that it’s basically a crop body-only lens and wouldn’t work for full frame digital or film cameras. IIRC it can be mounted on them, but will vignette if you go too wide. Still, if you have no interest in upgrading to full frame anytime soon, it’s an excellent value for the money.

[prair]

well, i was worried about losing the 18-27mm if i bought the tamrom 28-75mm, so i went through a bunch of my photos i’ve taken to check out the focal length. turns out that a lot of my shots are in the 22-55mm range, and the ones that are closer to 18mm, i was in a situation where i could definitely take a step back if i needed to.

so, i think i’m going to go with the tamron. i’m really looking forward to the f2.8. 🙂

anybody bought from this place or heard things about it?
sigma4less

[RcMacStudent]

I’ve never heard of them before but a quick googling shows pages of happy reviews, if that’s worth anything.

[3Horn]

well, i was worried about losing the 18-27mm if i bought the tamrom 28-75mm, so i went through a bunch of my photos i’ve taken to check out the focal length. turns out that a lot of my shots are in the 22-55mm range, and the ones that are closer to 18mm, i was in a situation where i could definitely take a step back if i needed to.

The only question I would have about that, is what is your actual digital focal length going to be? I know that with Nikon, the 28-75 would really be around 42-120.

Then again, I could just be talking out of my ass.

[U-Man]

Then again, I could just be talking out of my ass.

Mmmmpff mmppff mmmmmmmpf.

[Elsinore]

well, i was worried about losing the 18-27mm if i bought the tamrom 28-75mm, so i went through a bunch of my photos i’ve taken to check out the focal length. turns out that a lot of my shots are in the 22-55mm range, and the ones that are closer to 18mm, i was in a situation where i could definitely take a step back if i needed to.

The only question I would have about that, is what is your actual digital focal length going to be? I know that with Nikon, the 28-75 would really be around 42-120.

Then again, I could just be talking out of my ass.

Yeah, the crop factor will affect things, but Canon’s EXIF data doesn’t convert the focal lengths to crop factor equivelent, so if he’s looking through and seeing his photos are in the “22-55mm range”, then the 28-75mm Tamron will cover that.

I’ve never ordered from Sigma4Less, but I’ve heard nothing but good about them.

[prair]

or she…

🙂

[Elsinore]

Ya know, I usually play it safe and go with s/he, but I thought you’d made some kind of obvious gender reference. Guess that’s what thought did 😆

[prair]

got the tamron – love it, love it, love it.

(unedited except cropping)

[Author]

Posts