upgrade from the canon 17-55 kit lens...

**Bud** · 02-27-2011, 10:26 AM

Been using the kit lens that came with my T1i for about a year, ready to upgrade. I primarily take pics of skiers and landscapes, in bright sunlight and also in crappy low light conditions. I don't want to carry multiple lenses while I'm skiing or climbing, but I know that with my budget (around $450) I can either get a lens with more range or possibly a used lens with a wider aperture, but probably not both.

Guess I'm curious if folks have found their go-to lens for outdoor trips is an all-purpose large zoom lens like a 18-125 or a smaller standard zoom with a much better aperture.

**smalls** · 02-27-2011, 10:50 AM

an all-purpose zoom sacrifices image quality for range.

the tamron 17-50/2.8 is tack sharp and quite versatile. the only downside (to me) is that its AF is very loud, so don't use it for wedding or spy photography.

do a quick search for the lens in this forum and you'll find a ton of glowing reviews.

**Bud** · 02-27-2011, 10:56 AM

thanks. is it worth the extra $$ to get one that has image stabilization? I hadn't really been considering lenses that didn't have stabilization, but maybe thats not as important as I had originally thought.

**kidwoo** · 02-27-2011, 10:41 PM

Do some research on that tamron and if you decide you like it I'll probably have one up for sale pretty soon here.

**advres** · 02-27-2011, 10:52 PM

I know it doesn't fit your criteria but lately I have been shooting fast primes. For about $550 used, you can get a 35mm canon f/2, a 50mm canon f/1.8 and a 85mm rokinon f/1.4. I know this isn't "ideal" for your type of shooting, but these three lenses combined cost less than my other 3 lenses individually and I haven't stopped shooting with them since I got them. I have $2500 in other lenses that are essentially collecting dust now. But the lens I would absolutely take on any trip for a walkaround lens is my 17-55 2.8

My next purchase is the 8mm f/3.5 rokinon.

That being said, double your budget and the ef-s17-55 is slick. If you don't mind the speed reduction and wide angle, you can usually find a 24-105 f/4L for relativity cheap. I was able to talk a craigslist guy down to $700 for it. That's essentially a 38-168 on a crop body and the lens rocks.

PS... take my advice with a grain of salt. I am by no means a pro and have gone about this whole photography thing 100% incorrectly, financially. I'm just giving you what I have learned whether it be right or wrong.

**deciblast** · 02-27-2011, 11:26 PM

Originally Posted by gameface

I know it doesn't fit your criteria but lately I have been shooting fast primes. For about $550 used, you can get a 35mm canon f/2, a 50mm canon f/1.8 and a 85mm rokinon f/1.4. I know this isn't "ideal" for your type of shooting, but these three lenses combined cost less than my other 3 lenses individually and I haven't stopped shooting with them since I got them. I have $2500 in other lenses that are essentially collecting dust now. But the lens I would absolutely take on any trip for a walkaround lens is my 17-55 2.8

My next purchase is the 8mm f/3.5 rokinon.

That being said, double your budget and the ef-s17-55 is slick. If you don't mind the speed reduction and wide angle, you can usually find a 24-105 f/4L for relativity cheap. I was able to talk a craigslist guy down to $700 for it. That's essentially a 38-168 on a crop body and the lens rocks.

PS... take my advice with a grain of salt. I am by no means a pro and have gone about this whole photography thing 100% incorrectly, financially. I'm just giving you what I have learned whether it be right or wrong.

Rokinon 8mm f/3.5 $260
Olympus Zuiko 28mm f/3.5 $60
Pentax SMC 50mm f/1.4 $90
Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 $250
-----------------------------
Total $660

**bfree** · 02-28-2011, 01:02 AM

I find my tammy 17-50's AF to be too slow for skiing. I'm no pro and don't have pro athlete friends, so I don't bother to setup a prefocused shot very often. Therefore, I rely on AI servo with AF to track the shots. I love my canon 70-200f4 for this (bought it for under your budget too), and want to upgrade my tamron to the 17-55 2.8is.

**Bud** · 02-28-2011, 09:34 AM

thanks for the comments. sounds like theres a consensus that a faster lens is going to be better than going for something with a really wide zoom range.
i do want to monkey around with primes eventually, but for the time being i just want to replace the kit lens with something better and not have to change lenses while i'm out.
and yeah...if money was no limit, the canon ef-s17-55 2.8is would be my obvious choice, but i don't have that kind of money to throw at what is still a relatively new hobby.

**shroom** · 02-28-2011, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by gameface

PS... take my advice with a grain of salt. I am by no means a pro and have gone about this whole photography thing 100% incorrectly, financially. I'm just giving you what I have learned whether it be right or wrong.

With this thought in mind, would it be a smarter investment to purchase a body alone, and then the 17-50/ 2.8, rather than buying a kit bundled with a lense?

**advres** · 02-28-2011, 06:05 PM

Originally Posted by shroom

With this thought in mind, would it be a smarter investment to purchase a body alone, and then the 17-50/ 2.8, rather than buying a kit bundled with a lense?

Depends. 2 scenarios. If you don't have the money to get both right away, it would suck to have the body and no lens so I would buy the kit (like I did). If you do have the money for both, I would just get the body and the lens separate. Good thing if you go with the kit, you can usually get your money back reselling the lens on eBay. I sold my kit 18-55 for $96 once I upgraded so technically I didn't really "lose" that much buying kit first. And quite frankly, I bought it that way because I had no intention of becoming a lens hoarder.

**Bud** · 02-28-2011, 07:19 PM

i bought my T1i refurbished from Adorama.... even with the kit lens it was a lot less than a new camera body.

**smmokan** · 02-28-2011, 08:04 PM

I highly suggest the newer Canon 15-85 IS lens. Tack sharp, super fast AF, and it's got a great build quality to it as well. You can find a used one for around $600-650. A lot of reviews rate it as sharp (or damn close) as the 17-55 f/2.8 lens.

**leftfield** · 02-28-2011, 10:53 PM

Originally Posted by smmokan

I highly suggest the newer Canon 15-85 IS lens. Tack sharp, super fast AF, and it's got a great build quality to it as well. You can find a used one for around $600-650. A lot of reviews rate it as sharp (or damn close) as the 17-55 f/2.8 lens.

seconded

**Bud** · 03-01-2011, 06:59 PM

is the 15-85 really that good? from my limited research, i always hear 'get a fast lens' and 'don't get something with too much range or you'll have compromised optics' but it would be nice to get something with more range than just 50-55 max and get nice sharp images. starting to think that maybe i save my pennies for another few months and try to stretch the lens budget up to $600.

**supermodel159** · 03-02-2011, 10:38 AM

Sorry for the thread jack...anyone ever use the Rokinon 14 2.8?

**advres** · 03-02-2011, 11:10 AM

I haven't yet but I can tell you the Rokinon 85mm 1.4 is sexy as hell. Right now I am watching a Rokinon 8mm fisheye on ebay. As long as you don't mind manual focus and manual aperture adjustment their glass is quality.

**supermodel159** · 03-02-2011, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by gameface

I haven't yet but I can tell you the Rokinon 85mm 1.4 is sexy as hell. Right now I am watching a Rokinon 8mm fisheye on ebay. As long as you don't mind manual focus and manual aperture adjustment their glass is quality.

Thanks, I might just pick it up and give her a try.

**smmokan** · 03-02-2011, 11:16 AM

Originally Posted by Bud

is the 15-85 really that good? from my limited research, i always hear 'get a fast lens' and 'don't get something with too much range or you'll have compromised optics' but it would be nice to get something with more range than just 50-55 max and get nice sharp images. starting to think that maybe i save my pennies for another few months and try to stretch the lens budget up to $600.

I can't compare it to the 17-55 f/2.8 IS since I've never owned that one, but the 15-85 IS is tack sharp and focuses as fast as just about any other lens out there. For my needs, I don't need a fast lens in that range... with the 15-85, I'm almost always using it outside to shoot landscapes or sports, in good light. No need for a 2.8 lens. I'd prefer the additional range, the higher quality build, and the fast AF. It has all of those.

**IRideCO** · 03-03-2011, 12:52 PM

I'll go ahead and third the 15-85 IS. It's been my favorite all around lens for skiing and other sports.

**NashBoarder** · 03-03-2011, 02:31 PM

I have a 17-55 and absolutely love it. The one thing I wish it had was a bit longer zoom. Can't have everything though. When the 15-85 came out, I was really intriqued with it. If you see yourself going to a 3 or more lens quiver, I'd stick with the 17-55 as my walk around. If you are going to go with one or two lens and stay with that, it's tough to beat the versatility of the 15-85. Pretty damn wide and has a decent zoom on it while still providing great photos.

**Bud** · 03-03-2011, 03:24 PM

thanks for all the advice guys....sounds like there are a few options i'd be happy with, but since i really don't want to carry multiple lenses in the backcountry and i would like a bit more range than the kit lens, guess i'll be putting off the purchase till i can get my paws on a 15-85.

**smmokan** · 03-03-2011, 03:46 PM

The real answer here is easy... buy the Sigma 18-125mm OS HSM I have for sale a few threads down. (it really is a great skiing lens)

**couloirman** · 03-03-2011, 05:55 PM

I just picked up the 15-85 for $640 refurbished on the canon website. Good deal if you ask me.

**Bud** · 03-03-2011, 06:22 PM

yeah, i saw that too..was hoping that i wouldn't get dinged WA state sales tax, but once in the shopping cart, tax got added...price goes up to $720.

**LeeLau** · 03-03-2011, 06:41 PM

I have the 15 - 85 and it's a stunningly good lens. Useful wide angle. Pretty good reach for a do it all lens. The IS works quite well and it's auto focus is fast