Please help me decide on my first lenses!

Steves1982 · 5 Feb 2012 at 17:36

I am having a hard time deciding on a lens line up to go with my 1st DLSR which I have decided will be a Canon 550d. I have about £1000 to spend in total and have shopped around to find out the best prices (usually DigitalRev). I have also read pages of reviews and comments on various lenses and have narrowed myself down to 3 options which are roughly the same price and will give me a bit of spare change for memory cards, a bag and maybe some filters.

I am mainly looking for a general walk around lens as I will be taking it on holidays and don't want to take too much equipment. At home I will mainly just be using it on days out with the kids, family portraits and landscapes. I'm not interested in having a large zoom range at the moment as will not really be taking any sport or wildlife photos yet.

Please can I have some advice about what will be my best choice from the following 3 set ups? I can't make up my mind myself so any feedback will be gratefully received (price includes 550d body only)

Option 1: Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM + Canon 50mm f/1.8 = £950 - Seems to give me the range I'm after and has good reviews all round.

Option 2 - Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM (2nd hand) = £975 - I like the low light capabilities of this lens but not sure if I would miss the higher range and the 2mm from the bottom. Also not sure if there would be much point having a 50mm prime with this as can't see it being used much with this lens.

Option 3 - Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non VC + Canon EF 50 mm f/1.4 USM = £900 - Shying away from the Tamron a bit due to QC issues I keep reading about. As a complete noob to DSLR I'm not sure I could tell if I got a good one or not! Also I think some sort of IS would be very handy for me and I know the VC Tamron is not meant to be great. This option though would give me the money to pick up the 50mm 1.4 which seems to be highly rated.

So what should I get?

Alpherah · 5 Feb 2012 at 17:57

Option 3 if you can find a used Tamron with picture evidence of its quality (so avoiding QC issues)

Otherwise

Option 2 - imo

ARD · 5 Feb 2012 at 18:06

Only thing I can see from your options is that you are limiting your focal length, what will you be photographing?

Steves1982 · 5 Feb 2012 at 18:31

Alpherah said:
Option 3 if you can find a used Tamron with picture evidence of its quality (so avoiding QC issues)

Otherwise

Option 2 - imo

Ok, thanks. I was hoping to buy new though if possible for warranty reasons. The 17-55 would have to be 2nd hand though to come in under budget.

ARD said:
Only thing I can see from your options is that you are limiting your focal length, what will you be photographing?

It will mainly be the kids/family and landscapes at first. On holiday it will be the usual scenery, architecture, food etc etc.

Vertigo · 5 Feb 2012 at 18:31

I'd be inclined to go with option 1.

Without a longer lens to accompany your walkabout, I think the 85mm will prove useful at times and the 55/50 of the others a bit limiting. Plus the 15-85 will be new with a warranty (check this if using an importer like DigitalRev) and has a very good IS mechanism and is better built than the 17-55. The only downside to the 15-85 is that it's not constant f/2.8 like the others.

Steves1982 · 5 Feb 2012 at 18:39

Vertigo1 said:
I'd be inclined to go with option 1.

Without a longer lens to accompany your walkabout, I think the 85mm will prove useful at times and the 55/50 of the others a bit limiting. Plus the 15-85 will be new with a warranty (check this if using an importer like DigitalRev) and has a very good IS mechanism and is better built than the 17-55. The only downside to the 15-85 is that it's not constant f/2.8 like the others.

That's what is making it a tough choice. The f/2.8 would be very useful but limits my range. I expect though that most of my lower light photography would be indoors at restaurants, parties and so on so maybe the 15-85 would be good for a walkabout and then the 50mm f/1.8 would cover the rest?

Invertigo · 5 Feb 2012 at 20:04

maximusmi2 said:
Option 1: Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM + Canon 50mm f/1.8 = £950 - Seems to give me the range I'm after and has good reviews all round.

Option 2 - Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM (2nd hand) = £975 - I like the low light capabilities of this lens but not sure if I would miss the higher range and the 2mm from the bottom. Also not sure if there would be much point having a 50mm prime with this as can't see it being used much with this lens.

Either of these 2 are ideal walkabout lenses. However, your prices are higher than new prices, not 2nd hand!

The 15-85mm is currently available brand new from Camera World for £537, and the 17-55mm (which is on par with L glass, minus the red ring and weather sealing) is available for £753 from Harrison Cameras, both brand new UK stock with Canon warranty.

Personally, I'd rather have the 17-55mm, but I feel I make more use of the f/2.8 aperture than the extra focal length, your situation may vary! The 15-85 has 4 stop IS, whereas the 17-55 has 3 stop IS, both of which are useless with moving subjects, so consider that.

Steves1982 · 5 Feb 2012 at 20:14

Invertigo said:
Either of these 2 are ideal walkabout lenses. However, your prices are higher than new prices, not 2nd hand!

The 15-85mm is currently available brand new from Camera World for £537, and the 17-55mm (which is on par with L glass, minus the red ring and weather sealing) is available for £753 from Harrison Cameras, both brand new UK stock with Canon warranty.

Personally, I'd rather have the 17-55mm, but I feel I make more use of the f/2.8 aperture than the extra focal length, your situation may vary! The 15-85 has 4 stop IS, whereas the 17-55 has 3 stop IS, both of which are useless with moving subjects, so consider that.

Thanks.

The price I listed was including the 550d from DigitalRev but I would have to get the 17-55 2nd hand if I went for that option.

I doubt I will be taking photos of moving subjects much so that shouldn't be a problem.

I am tempted by the 15-85 for the greater range but on holiday we normally take a lot of photos in the evening/night in outside bars and tavernas and the like. By the looks of it it might not perform that well in these situations and I don't want to be intrusive by using a flash.

Invertigo · 5 Feb 2012 at 20:23

Well, at 15mm the 15-85 will be f/3.5. 4 stops of Is will make it equivalent to an f/0.9 lens in terms of stability for static subjects (as in, you can allow 4 stops more light in via the shutter without losing stability)....whereas f/2.8 minus 3 stops is equivalent to f/1.0 (in the same way, via 3 stops of shutter speed only).

Obviously, f/2.8 allows more light in for capturing moving subjects in the dark, as well as a shallower depth of field. It's all about preference. The 15-85 and 17-55 are commonly rated as the absolute sharpest EF-S walkabout lenses (the 24-70L would beat them most likely, but 24mm is quite long on a x1.6 crop) so its all down to whether you want the range or the extra 0.6-1.3 stops of light

mrgubby · 5 Feb 2012 at 20:37

You can always crop the image to get "length" but nothing can replace extra aperture

dfarrall · 5 Feb 2012 at 20:43

For a walkabout lens i would definatly say 1, then with the cash you have left throw in a 50mm prime for those low light situations

Invertigo · 5 Feb 2012 at 21:02

mrgubby said:
You can always crop the image to get "length" but nothing can replace extra aperture

true!

550D has an 18 megapixel sensor....huge image to crop down and will still print very high quality!

I tend to crop my 7D images, then resize to 8mp jpegs for flickr/hosting.

theheyes · 5 Feb 2012 at 21:28

I'd be tempted to go with just the 550D and the tamron 17-50 for now, and save the change until you absolutely know which lens you want next. I own/have owned the tamron, the 50 1.8 and the 1.4. For general purpose on a crop body I'd take the 17-50 every time.

Rojin · 5 Feb 2012 at 21:41

Option 3 but look at the Sigma 30mm f1.4 instead of the 50mm.

An Exception · 5 Feb 2012 at 22:37

Neither, I'd much rather a used 5d classic over a 550D (used to have a 550D) and then get some decent FF lenses, and no way would I ever touch a variable aperture lens...

Invertigo · 5 Feb 2012 at 22:59

An Exception said:
Neither, I'd much rather a used 5d classic over a 550D (used to have a 550D) and then get some decent FF lenses, and no way would I ever touch a variable aperture lens...

Well, for reference, the 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 is easily as sharp as the 17-55mm f/2.8, so variable aperture isn't always a bad thing!

FF is a matter of choice. I shoot sports and motorsport...therefore a crop sensor and the 7D AF and FPS are beneficial to me. I didn't want a 1D3, which would have both cost more and forced me to sell my 17-50mm for a 24-70mm, which again would be quite long on a 1.3X sensor.

Crop vs FF is purely dependant on the application. As mentioned, the 7D AF and FPS beats anything this side of a 1D series camera, for much less cost!

I understand and agree with your preference on a fixed aperture lens, as my current lens choices should prove, but that doesn't mean that variable aperture lenses are worse. I have no doubt that a Canon 15-85mm is sharper at 50mm f/11 than my Tamron, but I chose the Tamron for low light shooting (hence why I'm currently looking at a Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS myself!)

Rojin · 6 Feb 2012 at 00:29

Invertigo said:
I have no doubt that a Canon 15-85mm is sharper at 50mm f/11 than my Tamron, but I chose the Tamron for low light shooting (hence why I'm currently looking at a Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS myself!)

It's not: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=5 Very little in it if anything.

I had gear lust of the 17-55 f2.8 IS until I used one, it didn't offer anything over the Tamron 17-50 I had. IS I have very little use for and the 5mm at the long end means very little. Try one before you buy if you can.

Hodders · 6 Feb 2012 at 07:45

Option 2 100 times over.

The lens is a cracker and you cannot use IS to make up for a smaller aperture - is will never turn a f5.6 lens into a f2.8. It will basically act as a virtual tripod, it will not freeze motion or give you the dof/bokeh that a faster lens will.

If you go for option 1 or 3 you will end up wanting to upgrade at some point.

But whatever you go for enjoy your new toys.

An Exception · 6 Feb 2012 at 08:31

Invertigo said:
FF is a matter of choice. I shoot sports and motorsport...therefore a crop sensor and the 7D AF and FPS are beneficial to me. I didn't want a 1D3, which would have both cost more and forced me to sell my 17-50mm for a 24-70mm, which again would be quite long on a 1.3X sensor.

Crop vs FF is purely dependant on the application. As mentioned, the 7D AF and FPS beats anything this side of a 1D series camera, for much less cost!

This is indeed a bit complicated with the Canon line up in terms of crop Vs FF, but he's not considering a 7D but a 550D, also he's stating he wants to use the camera for landscapes and portraits, and not sports and wildlife (at least not yet), if that's the case then the 5d classic is the clear favourite.

I'v been down the Ops route myself, and by the time you know enough to realise you have made a mistake, it's an expensive mistake, akin to switching camps, as you have to sell most of your gear if you want to move up to FF.
Spending over £900 for a crop only lens seems insane to me, would much rather a used 5D and a decent prime or two over any F5.6 zoom...

Steves1982 · 6 Feb 2012 at 09:25

Thanks for all the replies guys. Think I may be further away from a decision now than I was before!

I think a used 5d will be outside my budget though if I want to get decent glass with it as well.