BEST WALK AROUND LENS FOR CANON 7D

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by david israel, Feb 5, 2011.

  1. Ok... I am sure this has been asked a 1000 times before, but I have not been on for a while and I am seriously looking to buy a new lens for my new Canon 7D. I am looking for the "Best" walk around lens. I am not concerned with the cost as I am looking to get something that will stay with me for a while. Anyway I currently own the following lenses and I am willing to sell some to make room in my bag for the new one. I enjoy all type of photography... from Macro to landscape and everything in between.. I would really appreciate any advice.
    Lenses Currently Owned:
    1. Canon 50MM 1.8 ($100.00 One)
    2. Canon 70-300MM 4-5.6 IS USM
    3. Canon 100MM 2.8 Macro (Love this one)
    4. Canon 10-22MM 3.5-4.5 (Love this one)
    5. Canon 28-105MM 3.5-4.5 (Weak walk around)
    6. Canon 28-80MM 3.5-5.6 (Kit lens from my first Canon film camera)
    7. Tamron 19-35MM 3.5-4.5
    Thanks,
    David
     
  2. Canon 24-105 F/4 IS USM
     
  3. Second the 24-105... love it on my 7D
     
  4. To me at least, 24mm is fine on a full frame sensor, but on a crop sensor such as your 7D 24mm is not very wide.
    I have the Canon 50D and my walk around is the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, and would be my thoughts, . . .the f/2.8 aperture is nice indoors and out, with and without flash.
     
  5. Another vote for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. Was what I used for street photography and street portraiture on my crop body. Superb for both.
     
  6. Brad and Jim, How does the Tamron perform in low light conditions? Indoors?
     
  7. Either the Canon 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM or the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, depending on whether you value reach or aperture.
     
  8. If you don't have a specific budgetary limit in mind, a better option may be the 17-55/2.8 IS (as opposed to the tamron). Its IS and USM w/ full time manual focus make it a bit more flexible than either the Tamron or the Sigma.
    24-105 is a good lens, just not a great lens, and on the crop it's not going to give the width that you'd expect to need on a walkaround, of course mileage may vary, but I've shot with it on the crop, and simply wasn't satisfied with it's performance.
     
  9. Looks like you have good glass in super wide, tele, and macro. I'd sell 5, 6, and 7 and get a good normal zoom. There's plenty of options out there, you just have to find out which fits your needs best. Off the top of my head, Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L, and 24-105mm f/4L IS come to mind as great choices.
     
  10. I find that my 24-70 f2.8 is a bit too long on my 7D (it is perfect on full frame) so I suspect the 24-105 will be the same (it is effectively 38.5 - 168 mm). I personally use the 16-35 F2.8 II on my 7D for general use but this is an expensive lens unless you also shoot full frame. Thus I suggest a lens like the 17-40 F4 or the EF-S 17-55 F2.8. If you want to sell something 5,6,7 look like good candidates but I suspect that you may find they are worth so little it is better to just keep them.
     
  11. Another vote for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8.
     
  12. Since you say you love the 100mm f2.8, I'd stick with that. Only you know what you like to shoot best and therefore what the best lens is for it. For walking around I like a 50mm f 1.4 but thats what I've been using for the most part for 40 years.
     
  13. I bought the 24-105 for my 7D and loved it until I bought the 15-85. I find it to be incredibly sharp and the 15mm end is extremely useful. The overall range is more useful on the 7D (24-136 equivalent) and as a result, this lens stays on my 7D most of the time. I've been using the 24-105 on my 1v lately since I can more fully appreciate its focal range with a full-frame camera.
     
  14. I vote for the Canon 18- 200, a USM lens. With it you can take a picture of someone across the dinner table from you then zoom in on something across the street. Sure, primes and some others can give better image quality, but few others can match its flexibility and range.
     
  15. The EF-S 15-85mm is the lens made for an APS-C body to roughly correspond to the EF 24-105mm on a 35mm sensor.
    The latter lens would serve on the smaller sensor if you are willing to carry around a wide angle lens too, but that defeats the idea of a "walk around" lens. On APS-C, it is a short normal lens to mid-range telephoto. No real wide at all.
    If lens "speed" is the critical variable, then the EF-S 17-55mm IS f/2.8, as said above. Personally, I would find it too short on the long end for a true walk around, however.
     
  16. not sure what you mean by "walk around lens"? Are you looking for a light lens, or something versatile like a 50mm?
     
  17. Ty,
    Looking for the everyday lens... The one that would be on my camera most of the time when not doing Macro or landscape work.... Travel, School plays, Birthday parties, street events.... that kind of thing... good all around lens that will be my main lens for everyday use..
    Thanks
    David
     
  18. If you plan to go full frame in the near future: Canon EF 17-40 f/4L (sometimes it feels a bit short) or Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L or Canon EF 24-104 f/4L IS (the last two lenses might feel a bit long on the wide end on a crop body)
    If you don't plan to go full frame: any of these or Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS
    []'s
    Antonio
     
  19. The bottom line, as you can see from the answers you've received so far, is it depends on what you are walking around. Opinions can be quite varied from two people walking around the same places.
    For me, the 24-70L is a favorite for some places, the EF-S 17-55 IS for indoor, typical room size places, and the 70-200 II for outdoor/garden shots but I'll use it indoors for portrait/detail work if the room size allows.
    The folks above have all given good recommendations, so you can see there is no one lens that everyone agrees is the perfect "walk around" lens. If you are able, rent one of the lens suggestions that most interests you and use it for a week, as you intend. That should tell you more about whether it meets your needs than anything I could suggest.
     
  20. David,
    Many people have suggested the 24-105. However, your comment beside your 28-105 is that you find it to be "weak walk around". In what ways do you find the 28-105 to be a weak walk around lens for your 7D? Is 28 not wide enough? If so, would 24 be wide enough? Is it not fast enough? On the wide end it is faster than the 24-105, but slower on the long end. If you can nail the reason(s) you find the 28-105 to be a weak walk around you can probably answer the question of the 24-105 without even having to rent one to try it out.
    The kit you describe seems to have the weak link in the 15/17/18-XX zoom range. So, the Tamron 17-50 or the Canon 15-85 or 17-55 would probably be the best additions to your kit.
    You describe travel, school plays and street events as possible uses for the "walk around" lens.
    School plays may need fast glass, so the f/2.8's become attractive. But, that begs the question of how close you can get to the stage. Will 50/55mm be sufficient from your seats? For stage performances I've considered the Tamron 28-75 and the Sigma 50-150 - both in f/2.8. However, those don't really meet your needs in other aspects of "walk around".
    Travel could involve any focal lengths. If you're thinking about buildings you will probably use wider focal lengths, but details on buildings may require more zoom.
    For street events, I use my EF-S 55-250. I like the reach. Even the f/5.6 on the long end works in the day time, but starts to be a stretch as the sun goes down. So, I sometimes use my 85 1.8 if its later in the day.
    Overall, I'd think the 15-85 would be the strongest candidate, unless you need low light capabilities.
    Of course, there are the 18-200/250/270 super zooms. But, if you love your 100 macro and 10-22 I doubt you'd be satisfied with the IQ.
    I hope this helps, especially the questions about the 28-105 insufficiency.
    DS Meador
     
  21. Not sure what you want to do with it, but walk around lens either the Tamron 17-55 or the Tamron 28-75. They are both f/2.8 lens and have excellent reviews.
     
  22. David,
    Sorry, I abandoned the thread last night and went to bed.
    You asked how the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 performed in low light, indoors.
    I find it satisfactory, and I don't have the VC (Tamron's designation for IS) version, but wish I did. The VC would certainly improve mine in the low light area of use.
    Many good comments and opinions, and I agree that only you can decide if the "fast glass" or "more reach" is what you're after in a "walk around" lens.
    Best wishes in your decision,
    Jim j.
     
  23. Two Thirds of all my shots have been with a 24-105. When I need wider I have a 10-22, longer I use 70-200. I wouldn't give up the reach of the 24-105 just to gain on the short end but, that is just me. Others may prefer the opposite.
     
  24. I'm with Richard. I use the 24-105 most of the time on by 7D. It's the lens that's on my camera unless I need a different lens. If you find the 28-105 weak because of the focal length or because it is too slow, then you probably won't like the 24-105 any better. If you find it perfect except for IQ, variable aperture or lack of IS, then the 24-105 will be exactly what you want.
     
  25. Ef-s 15-85. Reasons: 1) image quality, 2) zoom range, 3) price. If you love your 10-22 you will be disappointed by the ef 24-105 because although it's a great lens, with your APS-C sensor will prove not wide enough. 24-70 f/2.8L still isn't wide enough and moreover hasn't the zoom range a walkaround lens should have. It's not a fast lens but the IS compensates really well.
    Since your equipment doesn't fit the full sensor series anyway and since your 7D is obviously your new camera (so you will spend a good deal of time with it until you upgrade - if you ever do so) why spend the money for an L series lens? The ef-s 18-200 would be great if it had a descent image quality (which it doesn't). For me who have been looking recently for the same lens it's an obvious choice for a walkaround lens.
     
  26. I also vote for the 28-105. It's been my walk around lens for 5 years now. Probably 80 of my photos end up from that lens.
    An additional benefit - the zoom on the 580EX flash matches the 28-105.
     
  27. >>> Brad and Jim, How does the Tamron perform in low light conditions? Indoors? For a zoom, excellent. The large (for a zoom) f/2.8 aperture lets in lots of light. If you're going to be shooting a lot in low light indoors, you can do better with a prime at f/2.0 or f/1.4, but with loss of focal length flexibility. When I bought my Tamron 17-50, I compared it across the counter with Canon's 17-55 f/2.8 IS. Being lighter and smaller made it an easy choice for a walking around lens that I'd be using a lot. IS was not important to me. The fact that it was a bit more than 1/3rd the price of the canon was icing on the cake (even though I was prepared to pay the extra $$$). The Tamron also comes with a hood, nice case, and a 6 year warranty. Not so with the Canon. For street photography and street portraiture, something I do a LOT, looking back (today I use a 5DII and 35/1.4 now) it was a great decision.
     
  28. 5. - Canon 28-105
    2. Canon 10-22
     
  29. The Tamron 18-270 F3.5-6.3 is a good all purpose lens on the 7D, it is not the best lens for any one given situation but it covers a wide range for a walk around lens. A high end prime lens will always give you a better photo if you want to carry enough of them around with you.
    Jim
     
  30. David: If you simply enter
    BEST WALK AROUND LENS FOR CANON 7D

    in the search field and compare the handful of choices to what you own, the answer is there.
     
  31. Hello Peter,
    Yes I realize that but sometimes fresh responses to this question may yield updated responses now that people have been using the 7D for a while...
    Thanks,
    David
     
  32. The Tamron with VC does very well indoors, I think it would take a much faster lens to do as well without the VC if used hand held. I us AV much of the time indoors and most of the time the lens is not wide open. I have used AV with ISO 800 and had satisfactory results in low light. When you start using faster than the 3.5 the depth of field is going to be very shallow. The Tamron is the lens that stays on my 7D most of the time.
    Jim
     
  33. Another vote for the 17-40 f4. It might seem a little too slow for an all purpose lens, but with the outstanding high iso performance these days, its more than manageable. It was my first L lens, and honestly my first serious piece of glass. Even though 64mm (crop body) might seem too short, I found that it pushed me to get closer into the action, and really evaluate each shot. I'd say this one lens contributed to the most to making me a better photographer, instead of just sitting on the side zooming away. Of course there were plenty of times I wished i had something longer, or a larger aperture for portraits, but that's just part of life. This lens was an excellent pair with the nifty 50, and between the two I learned quite a bit.
    Not to mention the fact that an L series lens will hold it's value much better, (especially if you buy it used) but is also tack sharp, weather sealed, and just generally a step up. I fell in love with a 28-135IS on my 30D quite a while ago, but still found myself coming back to the 17-40. Now that I've switched up to full frame, the 17-40 is still on my camera a majority of the time. I will concede that I mainly shoot architecture/interiors/landscape, so your mileage may vary.
     
  34. Whatever lens you decide to get, make sure it is short enough so you can use the pop-up flash. With the 24-70mm on my 7D I get strong dark shadows at the bottom of the image when I set the lens to 24mm and try to use the pop-up flash.
    I would assume that any lens around that size would get you the same results. If you don't mind the weight, the 24-70mm is a great choice very sharp and contrasty. The closest thing to the 24-70 which I consider a FF lens, is the 17-55mm f2.8. This lens is light, fast, very sharp, expensive and is a perfect companion to the 10-22mm f3.5/4.5. It also focuses better in low light than the other two.
    For Travel(non-critical) I use ther 28-105mm f3.5/4.5 which gives me plenty of reach and is very light, compact(no pop-up problems) and cheap. To counter the softness at longer lengths, I might boost up the in-camera sharpening by 1 or 2 notches. Recently I purchased the discontinued Canon 20-35mm f3.5/4.5 to complement this lens.
     
  35. If you really don't want any wide angle to speak of, a very cost effective alternative for most people to the EF 24-105mm IS lens is the older EF 28-135mm IS lens (ca. US$450 new), but since you already have the slightly shorter 28-105mm (tho' it doesn't have the IS)...... The 28-135 IS is a much underrated lens. It was the actual lens the older EF-S 17-85mm IS was meant to substitute for, for APS-C bodies.
    The 28-135mm, in fact, is often sold with the 7D body as a kit lens.
     
  36. Ty, Looking for the everyday lens... The one that would be on my camera most of the time when not doing Macro or landscape work.... Travel, School plays, Birthday parties, street events.... that kind of thing... good all around lens that will be my main lens for everyday use.. Thanks David In that case Dabid, I'd say a 24mm or a 35mm, but I would also be tempted to add a 50mm along with a 24mm.
     
  37. David - you have whole load of lenses and have still not given us any idea of what you are looking for from your next purchase. You say the 28-105 is a 'weak' walkaround lens. Why? You have to help us here. The fact you 'love' the 100f2.8 and the 10-22 suggests you have to compromise on either focal length or aperture.
    The 15-85, 17-55 f2.8 (or Tamron 17-50), 24-105 f4, and 24-70 all have diffferent compromises on top end, short end and aperture. So give us an example of what you would miss most for your listed uses. The ones I would consider are:
    Travel - to get some architectural wide angle and short telophoto for portraits: 17-55 or 15-85
    School plays - none of the above unless you are really close to the stage. But at a push 24-105.
    Birthday parties - wide angle for indoor shots and short telephoto plus wide aperture for low light: 15-55 (or the Tamron)
    Street events: lighting decent so 15-85 (at the long end not much slower than the 24-105 f4).
    Overall, I would opt for 15-85 and expect high failure rate at the school plays. But that's my preference.
     
  38. David - you have whole load of lenses and have still not given us any idea of what you are looking for from your next purchase. You say the 28-105 is a 'weak' walkaround lens. Why? You have to help us here. The fact you 'love' the 100f2.8 and the 10-22 suggests you have to compromise on either focal length or aperture.
    The 15-85, 17-55 f2.8 (or Tamron 17-50), 24-105 f4, and 24-70 all have diffferent compromises on top end, short end and aperture. So give us an example of what you would miss most for your listed uses. The ones I would consider are:
    Travel - to get some architectural wide angle and short telophoto for portraits: 17-55 or 15-85
    School plays - none of the above unless you are really close to the stage. But at a push 24-105.
    Birthday parties - wide angle for indoor shots and short telephoto plus wide aperture for low light: 15-55 (or the Tamron)
    Street events: lighting decent so 15-85 (at the long end not much slower than the 24-105 f4).
    Overall, I would opt for 15-85 and expect high failure rate at the school plays. But that's my preference.
     
  39. You can't go wrong with either the EF 17-40 f/4L or the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS
     
  40. David, get the EF-S 15-85 IS and a good flash. Shoot your school plays and such with the 100/2.8. I have both the 17-55 and the 24-105. From all I hear and see in lens tests, the 15-85 matches the 24-105 for IQ, which I find is achingly sharp and contrasty. Its bokeh is not so great, however. The 17-55 is just as sharp, but loses a bit of contrast from internal flare in harsh light. I find it too short too often for general use. Indoors is where it really shines. All 3 are great lenses and worthy choices. I can't choose between the two, since they serve complementary not competing roles. If I needed to choose and carry forever and ever only one lens, it would not be one of the two, hence my recommendation for the 15-85. A good flash will equalize the f/2.8 advantage enough of the time. When you want really fast and shallow, f/2.8 isn't fast enough or shallow enough. (A 430EXii is almost a must have, given the 7D's remote triggering capability.)
     
  41. Zeiss ZE 35mm f2.0
     
  42. it

    it

    It depends what you walk around.
     
  43. I'm also with Richard. The 24-105 sits on my 7D 90% of the time. If I need something wider, I use my 10-20. Longer, the 70-200. I rarely use the 10-20, as I find 24 to be sufficiently wide in most cases except very close indoor shots or broad, sweeping landscapes...neither of which I commonly shoot. More often, I find myself reaching for length.Your situation may be different, but you already have the 10-22, so you really don't need something that covers this range.
    I find Diamandis Totief's argument weak. If you love your 10-22, the 24-105 is a perfect complement. Why buy a lens that overlaps more than half the range (15-85)? Switch lenses when you need to, and buy lenses that flesh out your collection in areas you're struggling with, rather than buying a lot of overlap, especially since it seems you already have a few lenses that overlap quite a bit (Canon 28-105MM 3.5-4.5; Canon 28-80MM 3.5-5.6; Tamron 19-35MM 3.5-4.5). Also, all the EF lenses fit APS-C cameras and avoid the edges, where all of the problems lie...so you're getting the sweetest part of fabulous lenses. How can you argue against that?
     
  44. Why buy a lens that overlaps more than half the range (15-85)? Switch lenses when you need to...​
    Frankly, because any overlap stays in the bag with the other lens. Once the lens is on the camera, there is no overlap. It either reaches, or it doesn't, in which case you can then choose which overlapping range you'll switch to. ;) You'll note that the 24-105 overlaps the 70-200 by a significant proportion also.
     
  45. On my Canon 40D I always kept my Ef 35mm L 1.4 on it as a walk around lens, but that was because it was what suited my personal needs.
     
  46. If I plan walking light, I mount the 50 f/1.4 on my 7D and sometimes take the 20 f/2.8 with me if I should need something wider.
    Although I have a 28-70 f/2.8L, I rarely use it any more these days. I prefer walking around with the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8.
    I'm no big fan of the zooms. If you look at your pictures you often will see that 80% or more are shot with the same (your favourite) focal length. Mounting a prime lens in this range will give you better results than most zooms can deliver, and if you should ever need another range, switch the lenses. It doesn't take too much time after all :)
    Kind regards,
    Christian
     
  47. Vote for 15-85. I had the 17-40L and 24-105L with my old 5D, but since moving to the 7D and away from income based photography, I had a good hard look at my needs which sound similar to yours. The 17-40 was not long or wide enough on crop. I dismissed the 17-55 2.8 for the same reasons. The 24-105 ran it close, but the wide angle made the difference for me. The IS on the 15-85 helps in low light and I use primes if I need shallow DOF or want to travel really light. My normal set up for walk around with no particular aim is 15-85 and 70-300 DO.
     
  48. I have been looking for the same thing...I also own the Canon 7D and am looking for a multi-purpose lens. I shoot wildlife, kids, indoors, outdoors, auto racing, and anything else I find interesting. I have decided on the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM(looking to get it used to help with the cost, plus it has been discontinued and replaced with a more expensive 70-200 f/2.8 II:()...it will cover quite a range, has good reach, and will work both indoors and outdoors:) It looks like you already have the wide end covered so you may want to consider the 70-200?
     
  49. There are some size, weight, and handling issues with the 70-200, especially the f/2.8. I do see the benefits, though, and have done exactly that rather than change lens. On a full frame, 70mm isn't too very long. That's already wider than the 50mm when mounted on the 7D. On APS-C, 70mm is a bit too long and the near focus not quite close enough even when you can frame pleasantly. I do like its reach. Very often, I end up cropping wider shots for the more interesting shot buried inside. But that's way after the fact, with lots of time to reconsider and examine the details at leisure.
     
  50. My two main walkaround lenses I use with the 7D are the 24-70 2.8L and the 16-35 2.8L.
    Hard to beat their versatility and I wouldn't swap 'em for any other, unless someone gave me the 35mm 1.4L. :)
     
  51. For my money THE best lens for the 7D is the ef-s 17-55mm 2.8 it's the one i reach for most and IQ is second to none.
     
  52. Also alot ofpeople have been mentioning the 24-70 which is a great lens, but in my experience just not wide enough on a crop sensor, hope this helps.
     
  53. I totally agree with J Hickton.
     
  54. Tamron 17-50. It's sharper than the 24-105 on the 7D....it's faster, it's wider, and it's cheaper.
     
  55. With the exception of Ty and Andre it appears that zoom lenses are your only option. My favorite walk around lens is a 35mm (equiv) lens. It's small. It's fast. It sees the way I see. If you were to walk around with one prime lens you'd be amazed at what you can do. So the ideal lens for your 7D is the 24mm f1.4L.
     
  56. I might get laughed at, but my favorite walk around lens is the Canon 18-135mm IS 3.5-5.6. It is the perfect range for just about everything...wide and has enough zoom to get in tight when needed. It doesn't have the fastest aperture but does hold its own especially considering it has the newest IS (4 stops). When I need something faster I toss on the primes, but 90% of my shots are taken with this baby. It doesn't have USM but the focus is still very fast and spot on (I'd say 98% as good/fast as a USM). The best part...you can pick up a refurbished one for under $300!
     
  57. i like the 24-70, that is my primary, but i almost always have my camera backpack with me, so i supplement that with the 10-20. at least for street and portrait work that lens is great. the canon 35mm is awesome for a fast carry around on a copped frame.
     
  58. Speaking to "overlap", I find overlap good. I use the 24-105mm the 70-200mm and the 500mm plus the 1.4x TC. I've really got a lot covered and only miss the extreme WA and the short end of super-tele. The 24-105mm covers WA to portrait range and the 70-200mm covers portrait to tele. At the wide end I'm almost always at 24mm and at the long zoom end, I'm almost always a 200mm, but around the portrait range I'm in the 60-120mm range quite a bit. With overlap I think that I'm less inclined and compelled to mover from the 24-105mm to the 70-200mm. I chose which lens to mount on the camera depending on whether I'll be at the WA lens or at the tele end and I'm pretty indifferent in the middle.
    I should say that I work with two bodies, the 5D2 and the 7D, so that gives me added flexibility, to move between FF and 1.6-crop sensor.
     
  59. I have been happy enough with my 7D and the Tamron 18- 270MM lens that I will probably order the new Tamron 18- MM lens with the PZD it is a little lighter and quicker to focus according to a couple of reviews. This lens with the 7D gives you the range of a MM lens to a MM lens on a full frame and mine works fine with a Kenko pro 1.4 teleconverter. It makes it vary easy to walk around with everything from a wide angle to a MM lens with stabilization. The older model is selling for about $400 now ( this model is only a year old ) the new one has been on B & H for $649 That comes within the budget on brand new lens with 6 year warranty.
    Jim
     
  60. When the Canon 17-55mm 2.8 IS USM lens first came on the market here in the US, I bought it. I had a Canon 30 D at the time. I currently have seven lenses of which six are Canon. 75% of the time I have the 17-55 on my 7D. My second choice is the Canon 70-200 f4 IS lens. Light and sharp for me. Good luck. You have about three lenses suggested that are frequent repeats. I would be interested in what you purchase if anything........
     

Share This Page