Mid range lenses, deciding between 2?

lukechad

lukechad

lukechad

Soldato
Joined
25 May 2004
Posts
8,925
Location
Burton-On-Trent
Well as the London meet is now happening id like to get some new glass to take that will hopefully give me enough range to not have to chop and change between the 18-55 and the 55-250.

I am looking at no more than £250 really as a maximum!!

Looking around I see 2,

Canon 28-105mm EF (The new F3.5-4.5) II USM £215

or

Canon 18-135mm EF-S f/3.5-5.6 IS £225

Price wise both are just in budget. I like the idea of IS and more range of the 18-135 as I think that would be a perfect focal range for a walkabout lens, but am I going to be getting a lens of poor quality and image quality for this price?



/Discuss.
 
lukechad said:
Price wise both are just in budget. I like the idea of IS and more range of the 18-135 as I think that would be a perfect focal range for a walkabout lens, but am I going to be getting a lens of poor quality and image quality for this price?
Click to expand...

Personally I don't really see the advantage / disadvantage of either of those lenses over what you've already got. Is your current kit lens the IS or non IS version of the 18 - 55? The one I've got for my 450D is fine for what it does without being fancy and from what I've read about the 55 - 250 lens it again is a good lens for the price.

Although switching lenses may be a bit of a hassle, providing you're not kak handed, a few seconds switching lenses will save you a lot of money!

Do you have any accessories for your camera? From the last trip down to london I know a few folk regretted not taking a tripod (i regretted taking mine as i only used it right at the end and had to trail about with it for 6 - 8 hrs) Possibly rather than spending it on a new lens get a lightweight tripod (manfrotto or red snapper) perhaps a filter system as October time you will be able to get some decent sunsets in London at whichever landmark you end up at :)
 
I'd rather have two lenses that do something well, than one that tries to compensate for both. Not that it'll be a bad lens, I imagine. But two lenses, especially them two is no fuss imo :).
 
I have the NON IS version of the 18-55 that came with my 1000D.

Accessory wise im pretty much covered at the moment but dont think I will be hauling a tripod along with me, I have a mini one in the bag which if need be I will use for some longer exposure shots.

Maybe not worth the £££ then afterall? I just dont like changing my lenses everytime I want more or less reach on an image and thought that this would see the end of that for the majority of my stuff.

Thanks guys for saving me £225 :), now, what to spend it on instead :p A macro lens perhaps :/
 
I have the nifty fifty already mate :) Didnt include it in the list as I didnt deem it relevant to my thinking :)
 
lukechad said:
I have the nifty fifty already mate :) Didnt include it in the list as I didnt deem it relevant to my thinking :)
Click to expand...

Ah ok - can't think of much else then! Only other idea is replace whatever lens you use most (assuming 18-55), but if it's anything like the Nikon one, the 18-55 is actually fairly sharp.
 
May save the cash, Im getting myself a backdrop soon to get some practice in for portrait work.

I think I have more spare cash than sense at times :)
 
lukechad said:
Canon 28-105mm EF (The new F3.5-4.5) II USM £215
Click to expand...
In crop body this one doesn't have any wide angle left.

Canon 18-135mm EF-S f/3.5-5.6 IS £225

...but am I going to be getting a lens of poor quality and image quality for this price?
Click to expand...
Bigger focal range (/zoom number) + low price = low(er) quality

The Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS may be somewhat better than the EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS but it's not exactly a good lens either. The resolution makes a rather wild roller coaster ride through the different quality levels. Large aperture settings should be generally avoided at 18mm and beyond the middle range - the borders/corners are plain soft here.
All-in-all it's not one of the more desirable lenses on the market...
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/462-canon_18135_3556is?start=1
 
lukechad said:
No actual thoughts on either lens :/
Click to expand...

My opinion, what you already have is much better. Neither lens you listed is that useful.

One way to swap changing lenses is just to take one lens with you. Especially just a prime lens. Then concentrate on the photography.

35mm FF equivalent is great for cities, so something like 24mm Unfortunately there aren't many good primes in that length that are cheap :(
 
Last edited:
D.P. said:
35mm FF equivalent is great for cities, so something like 24mm Unfortunately there aren't many good primes in that length that are cheap :(
Click to expand...

Tell me about it, shame really. Once I have the cash I'll be deciding between the older 17-35 f2.8 and the 17-40 f4 for something a bit wider. I like the idea of having a prime line up but just don't have the money for it anymore. I might have to look into Wedding photography for creating a lens fund :D
 
lukechad said:
I have the NON IS version of the 18-55 that came with my 1000D.

Accessory wise im pretty much covered at the moment but dont think I will be hauling a tripod along with me, I have a mini one in the bag which if need be I will use for some longer exposure shots.

Maybe not worth the £££ then afterall? I just dont like changing my lenses everytime I want more or less reach on an image and thought that this would see the end of that for the majority of my stuff.

Thanks guys for saving me £225 :), now, what to spend it on instead :p A macro lens perhaps :/
Click to expand...

Do you find the non IS 18-55 ok? Perhaps upgrading this may be an option? As for a macro lens, the Sigma 105 can be had second hand for around your budget.
 
I do find the 18-55 ok but dont use it all that often as I find it struggles with sharpness at the wide end. Other than IS is the quality of the 18-55 IS any better in reality?

Or should I look at something with similar focal range which will be a far better glass?

I was shooting next to a chap yesterday using the 100-400L, talk about lens envy!
 
According to reviews the IS is an improvement, secondhand you can get one for around £60. I've got to say though that I never really liked mine. I bought the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 non VC which was a great little lens, you can get this secondhand for around £230 (look for a sharp copy).

Have a look at the photography on the net forums. There is a lens archive section where users post examples of shots with a lens. There's probably a 1000D thread on there as well, always good to see what others are doing with the same body :)

Edit:

Lens samples: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=107
1000D user thread: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=717910&highlight=1000D
 
Last edited:
Thanks a lot mate! Just what ive been looking for!!

I was sick of searching for samples of different lenses on my body though google!!!

Bookmarked :)
 
I agree with Rojin - the Tamron 17-50 non VC would be a worthy upgrade to the kit lens. The IS version of the kit lens is apparently a significant improvement over the Tamron, but I do find mine to lack the IQ that I'd like at times - the Tamron excels in this area and offers f2.8 as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom