Which lens?

 

<p>2nd part to my question <a href="../canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00ZUg4">here:</a><br>

Okay finally managed to buy a used EOS 50D with only a 3600 shutter count :)</p>

<p>Now I need some help with the lens. I have four options. All these are used lenses.</p>

<p>1). Canon EF 28-200 USM<br />2). Canon EF 28-135 IS USM<br />3). Canon EF-S 18-200<br />4). Canon EF-S 17-85 IS USM</p>

<p>Please comment your opinion on all lenses.</p>

<p>Thanks in advance.</p>

 

 

<p>The 17-85 may be your best bet, and lends itself to being conveniently complemented by a 70-300 or 70-200 down the road. But really, it all depends on the kind of shooting you're going to do. Do you need the range out to 200 right away? Are you looking at superzooms because you don't want to switch lenses? There's a convenience factor to that, but everything has a trade off.</p>

<p>Enjoy your new-to-you 50D. I used to have one, nice camera. Remember that its sensor respods badly in terms of noise if you underexpose at ISO settings above 400, althoug high ISO is OK if you "expose to the right".</p>

<p>1). Canon EF 28-200 USM</p>

<p>A FF superzoom from film days with no IS. No WA range on a crop-factor body and compromised performance. Avoid.</p>

<p><br />2). Canon EF 28-135 IS USM</p>

<p>A FF standard zoom from film days, does have first-generation IS. No WA range on a crop-factor body. Respectable but not outstanding performance on FF but not ideal on a croo-actor body. Avoid.<br /> <br />3). Canon EF-S 18-200 (Isn't this IS?)</p>

<p>A crop-factor extreme superzoom with significantly compromised performance. Avoid.</p>

<p><br />4). Canon EF-S 17-85 IS USM</p>

<p>An early crop-factor standard zoom with les than stellar performance. You can do better.</p>

<p>Look at the following, in ascending orer of price.</p>

<p>5) EF-S 18~55/3.5~5.6IS (consider only the IS version, original or II). A budget kit-lens standard zoom that those who have used it report to be a pretty good lens, and certainly a real bargain.</p>

<p>6) EF-S 15~85IS. The current consumer-grade standard zoom, well-regarded by those who have reported on it.</p>

<p>7) EF-S 17~55/2.8IS. According to all reports, this is a lens of L-series optical quality, although mechanical quality is high-end consumer.</p>

<p>I agree with Robin.<br>

Actually I would ad one position to his list, numbered 5.5 in terms of price. For half a year I've been using Canon EF-S 18-135/3.5-5.6 IS lens. Surprisingly good quality, zoom range absolutely sufficient for 95% of every day shots, quite effective IS, attractive price (less than a half of position 6) - these are advantages of this choice.</p>

<p>It seems that you are interested in acquiring a superzoom (or near enough), and presumably, you understand the downside of <em>all </em>of the lenses of this genre. </p>

<p>While I can't disagree w/ anything Robin has posted, obviously you'll be taking price into consideration. With that in mind, I'd second Jack's suggestion to consider the EF-S 18-135/IS, as it's a pretty good lens (much better than the previous generation's superzooms), fairly inexpensive, and with IS -- really a must have on these lenses.<br>

If you need something longer (but a bit more expensive, though still not in the 15-85/17-55 price range), the Tamron 18-270 VC is a lens with similar performance to the 18-135 (though obviously has extended range).</p>

<p>I agree with Robin and stand by my lens recommendation in the previous thread; namely, that you should get either a 17-55 or a 15-85. And if you need more reach, you can pick up a 70-200/4 L IS later.</p>

<p>The 15-85mm is clearly better than the 17-85mm, but that does not mean that the 17-85mm is somehow an "unworthy" lens.</p>

<p>It's considerably cheaper than the newer version and is probably better than the other lenses on your list. The 28-135 is also fine, but shares a lot of the same 'breed' characteristics as the 17-85 - in fact it is the original "full-frame" after which the EF-S lens was modeled.</p>

<p>The 28-135 is only a 'normal' lens at the wide end on an APS-C camera, though. Some people don't miss wide angle. I bought one for my daughter who thinks it very useful on her APS-C cameras.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>"The 15-85mm is clearly better than the 17-85mm, but that does not mean that the 17-85mm is somehow an "unworthy" lens.</em><br /><em> It's considerably cheaper than the newer version and is probably better than the other lenses on your list."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Was thinking the same thing. 17-85 is still a decent upgrade over 18-55 kit lens with a little focal range and improved ergonomics/construction. That's what I'd pick from that list. If OP is shopping used bodies and asking specific about specific used lenses, it stands to reason that price is a factor.</p>

<p>For less money than the Canon 17-85 you can get the Sigma 17-70 OS which has a better aperture range with a slight decrease of focal length.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>17-85 is still a decent upgrade over 18-55 kit lens</p>

</blockquote>

<p>+1 and I assume we are talking about the 18-55 IS.</p>

<p>Thanks guys for the responses!</p>

<p>Think I'll go with the EF-S 17-85 IS USM, seems more logical for me :)</p>

<p>Any recommendations for filters to go with this lens? Somebody said the Hoya 67mm Pro1 Digital Circular Polarising Filter and the Pro1 Digital UV Filter.</p>

<p>Oh is there any way that I could connect my iPhone 3GS for remote shooting? Anyone know of an App or does Canon actually have a EOS Utility Tool for the iPhone? Now that would be great ;)</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Any recommendations for filters to go with this lens? Somebody said the Hoya 67mm Pro1 Digital Circular Polarising Filter and the Pro1 Digital UV Filter.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Get a polarizer if you want the effects that only polarizers can provide, such as eliminating glare and reflections, and saturating colours such as those of blue skies. And skip the UV filter, which does nothing but degrade image quality.</p>

Thanks. Appreciate that!

<p>Okay one final question and I will stop :)</p>

<p>What's the best 8GB memory card I should get?</p>

<p>Thanks.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>What's the best 8GB memory card I should get?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>1) be cautious who you buy it from. There are (were?) many serious counterfeits on eBay and the like. Such cards could even be a 256K card, with software (and a label) on it that made it look like a bigger capacity card, until you try to save something to it....<br /> 2) Look at the speeds supported by your camera. No point in buying a superspeed card that you camera won't use.<br /> 3) If you are <strong>not</strong> photographing sports or other quick sequence activities, you can buy fairly inexpensive cards that are slower, but plenty adequate for ordinary shooting.</p>

<p>I personally have a variety of cards from SanDisk to Kingston. The latter are priced nicely from the New York stores (B&H and Adorama) and I've never gotten ahead of them saving RAW and large jpegs on my 5D.</p>

<p>Oh, movies may be another thing altogether. Not having that option, it doesn't apply to me...</p>