Best small sized Wide Zoom Lens for EOS

[ajpn]

I have 24-70 L that I prefer on my 30D, but it's pretty damn large, especially

with the hood on it. In fact, I have had it with that lens and I want to

replace it with something comparable that is smaller.

 

Money is not an object, but the lens has to be quality glass and the smaller

the better. Obviously it's not going to be a Canon lens. Is there anything out

there as good as an L lens that is smaller?

[NK Guy]

Only manual focus only.

[bobatkins]

I'd go for a prime lens and zoom with my feet as much as possible. That's the only way you're going to get significantly smaller size and equal quality.

 

The 24-85 is quite a bit smaller, a lot lighter and the quality is pretty good. Not quite up to the 24-70 when wide open (and not as fast), but you are going to have to compromise somewhere.

 

Since you're using a 30D, image quality in the corners of a full 35mm frame isn't going to matter to you, which will help when using less expensive lenses. Some consumer zooms are pretty good at the corners of the APS-C frame.

[gdanmitchell]

" Obviously it's not going to be a Canon lens."

 

Not sure why it can't be Canon. Canon makes good zoom wides that will work well. Sizes

and prices and features vary, but some options include:

 

EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L - The crrent version or the new one coming "any day now." The

current one is fine on the 30D, but the new one might perform better on full frame. This is

not a small or inexpensive lens.

 

EF 17-40mm f/4 L - An excellent lens on crop sensor bodies at a very good price. One of

the least expensive L-quality zooms.

 

EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS - This crop sensor only lens is getting a lot of praise for image

quality, size and weight, image stabilization, and a very useful zoom range. Will not work

on full frame.

 

EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS - Optically not in the same category as the previous lenses but

can be a good option for photographers who want to cover a wider zoom range and will

not make giant prints.

 

If you want to go really wide on your 30D, the 10-22mm EF-S (crop sensor only) also gets

high marks from a lot of users.

 

I am personally familiar the 17-85mm (don't own it any more) and the 17-40mm. They are

both smaller than the 24-70. The 16-35 is the largest of the bunch and I _think_ it is a bit

smaller than the 24-70.

 

Dan

[casey mcallister]

Tamron 17-55 XRDi...But it is APS only

[ajpn]

Thanks Bob. What about something like the 17-70 Sigma ? What is the general consensus on something like that?

 

I will most likely have to hang on to my monster, but I am looking for something I can use to make my camera a little more portable when I need it to be.

 

I prefer using prime lenses, but in some situations being stuck at 24mm isn't too helpful.

[larry h.]

I'll second William's suggestion of the Tamron 17-50mm/2.8 zoom. I have it and love it. It is much smaller than Canon's 17-55mm/2.8 IS. The size and the price were two major factors in my decision for the Tamron. Sharpness was not because they are basically the same in image quality acoording to every review I have read.

 

Click on my name to find a recent thread where I also recommended the Tamron, but in more detail.

[larry h.]

Here's the thread...

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00KGDE

[bobatkins]

The Tamron 17-55/2.8 is a good lens and I've reviewed it on my website http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tamron_17-50_review.html

 

It's a tad soft wide open, but then that applies to most fast zooms.

 

If course the range doesn't make it a direct replcement for the 24-70/2.8, wheras the 24-85 does cover the same range.

 

I have something of an aversion to Sigma lenses like the 17-70 based on past experience of lens failures and non-compatibility issues. Maybe Sigma have solved both with their current lenses. I

 

I use an EF-S 17-85/3.5-5.6IS USM for that range when I'm just walking around not sure of what I'll be shooting. Not the world's sharpest lens at times when shooting wide open, but the wide zoom range and utility of the IS make up for that. If I wanted a zero distortion ultrasharp fast lens, I'd use a fast prime (and sometimes I do).

[anders_carlsson]

Also, if you want roughly the same range as the 24-70 and keep f/2.8, you might want to consider Tamron's 28-75 XR Di etc. If you get a good copy you'll have a lens with exceptional performance for the price and size on a 1.6x crop camera.

[brian robinson]

My recommendation is to go for Canon primes: 24, 50, 85. They are tack sharp, lightweight

and fast.

[j.a.]

SIGMA 17-35mm F2.8-4 EX DG ASPHERICAL HSM was awarded TIPA best consumer lens in Europe (2004)

 

Dimensions

- diameter 83.5mm

- length 88.7mm

3.3 in. x 3.4 in.

 

Weight 560g / 19.8 oz.

 

First price : 700 dollars

[j_smith6]

Small and "ok" quality? EF 24-85mm USM

[yakim_peled1]

>> I want to replace it with something comparable that is smaller.

 

 

24-105/4 IS.

 

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[matthijs]

Just a few thoughts:

 

On a crop body you might want to use a smaller lenshood on your 24-70. (If that's your biggest gripe...)

Otherwise: looking at a lot of pictures taken with other (smaller lenses) my first choice would be the 17-40L and my second choice, if I really needed the f2.8, would be the Tamron 17-50.

I haven't researched the EF 24-85 but who knows...

 

Regards,

 

Matthijs.