Recommended Me: Walkaround Lens

saxondale.

macrumors 6502
Original poster
May 20, 2006
390
0
England/China
I'm going to buy a new lens for the 350D. I'm looking at the Canon 17-55mm to replace my stock lens. Anyone have opinions of this lens? Have this lens?

Thanks
 

tdiep

macrumors member
Jul 24, 2007
30
0
I used that lens for quite awhile. Its a nice lens and is a perfect lens to replace the kit lens. Colors and contrast are good, and sharpness is very impressive. The IS is really nice to have in case you need it and of course the large 2.8 aperture is awesome.
 

Grimace

macrumors 68040
Feb 17, 2003
3,541
35
with Hamburglar.
I used to own the 17-55mm -- it is the finest piece of EF-S glass out there (10-22mm is a close second.)

It's pricey, but you will get gorgeous images.
 

failsafe1

macrumors 6502a
Jul 21, 2003
619
0
Is the stock lens you are replacing a 18-35? If so the 17-55 2.8 is an awesome lens. You will get a slight bit of overlap with your 10-22 but you still need the 10mm part for your wide angle capability.
 

tdiep

macrumors member
Jul 24, 2007
30
0
Well since you have the 10-22, I would recommend the 24-70 2.8. Use the 10-22 for your uwa needs, and use the 24-70 as your walk around lens.

Plus, the 24-70 has a much better build quality compared to the 17-55. Its a lot more robust but feels really good on your camera and in your hands
 

miloblithe

macrumors 68020
Nov 14, 2003
2,072
28
Washington, DC
Well since you have the 10-22, I would recommend the 24-70 2.8. Use the 10-22 for your uwa needs, and use the 24-70 as your walk around lens.

Plus, the 24-70 has a much better build quality compared to the 17-55. Its a lot more robust but feels really good on your camera and in your hands
It is really heavy though. What does "walk around lens" mean? Does it mean that you want it to be somewhat light and be able to leave your other lenses at home, or does it mean main lens that you have attached most of the time and you bring everything else with you?
 

saxondale.

macrumors 6502
Original poster
May 20, 2006
390
0
England/China
but my camera isn't fully framed, its 1.6x (i think they call it) and the 24-70mm wouldn't work well with it.

I will replace it with my 18-55mm.
 

miloblithe

macrumors 68020
Nov 14, 2003
2,072
28
Washington, DC
but my camera isn't fully framed, its 1.6x (i think they call it) and the 24-70mm wouldn't work well with it.

I will replace it with my 18-55mm.
Unless the range of the lens doesn't suit you, there's no reason that a full-frame lens won't work on a cropped sensor camera.
 

form

macrumors regular
Jun 14, 2003
187
0
in a country
I actually like the range of the Tamron 28-75 I use on my Digital Rebel XT. For wide angle I have a Sigma 10-20.
 

sjl

macrumors 6502
Sep 15, 2004
441
0
Melbourne, Australia
but my camera isn't fully framed, its 1.6x (i think they call it) and the 24-70mm wouldn't work well with it.

I will replace it with my 18-55mm.
The only incompatibility in Canon's current lineup is if you take a crop lens (ie: EF-S) and try to mount it on a 1.3 crop (1D series) or full frame (5D, 1Ds series, any film) body. Any EF lens will work perfectly on a 350D.

The only reasons to not get the 24-70mm f/2.8 in this case are (a) cost; (b) weight; (c) the range isn't what you want in a walkaround (in this case, if it's not wide enough and you have to keep swapping between the 24-70mm and 10-22mm.) Other than that, you should find that the quality is comparable between the 17-55mm and the 24-70mm, at least in the 24-55mm range (where they overlap).

Personally? I'd get the 24-70mm (I also have the 10-22mm, and the 24-70mm is a logical replacement for the EF-S 17-85mm in preparation for a move to full frame in a few years). But it's your money, your call, and you may prefer to have the wider option; only you can judge your photographic needs.
 

Grimace

macrumors 68040
Feb 17, 2003
3,541
35
with Hamburglar.
didn't know you had the 10-22mm already!!

DEFINITELY get the 24-70mm; I have it now (sold the 17-55mm to get it) and it is the best walk-around I could have dreamed.

Plus, if you ever upgrade to full frame, you can use it as the a wide-portrait lens.
 

tdiep

macrumors member
Jul 24, 2007
30
0
If you dont think 24mm is wide enough to suit you needs for a walk about lens, then go for the 17-55. A walk around lens to me, is a lens that you see yourself carrying around using the majority of the time.

If you find you like your 18-55 kit lens range, then go with the 17-55, but IMO I think the difference between 17 and 24mm is probably 2 steps forwards or backwards.

If you ever plan on going to FF or even a 1.3 body, just realize that you wont be able to use any of your ef-s lenses on those bodies. Just something to keep in mind for the future.
 

saxondale.

macrumors 6502
Original poster
May 20, 2006
390
0
England/China
I have just purchased the Canon 24-70mm. I realised my wide angle covered quite a bit and the 17-55mm would be a little jump. I don't mind changing around the lenses, since i go out photographing specific things, so i know which lens to use prior to this...most of the time.

You guys 100% sure that my 350D is compatable with this lens?

Cheers
 

tdiep

macrumors member
Jul 24, 2007
30
0
Good choice and yes, I am 110% sure its compatible

All of the Canon EF series lenses will work on all EOS mount cameras

Enjoy the lens, im sure you'll be happy with it
 

sjl

macrumors 6502
Sep 15, 2004
441
0
Melbourne, Australia
I have just purchased the Canon 24-70mm. I realised my wide angle covered quite a bit and the 17-55mm would be a little jump. I don't mind changing around the lenses, since i go out photographing specific things, so i know which lens to use prior to this...most of the time.

You guys 100% sure that my 350D is compatable with this lens?

Cheers
Absolutely. If it isn't, I'll pay you double what you paid for the lens and take it off your hands. That's how confident I am of the compatibility. :p

You won't be sorry you bought it.