Everyday lens ?

[cindy_stephenson]

Which of the two EFS 17-85mm or 28-135mm lens would be the better "everyday"

shooting lens? Nothing paticular. Usually people.

[mendonphoto]

Probably the 17-85. You won't need much longer than 85mm to capture even closeups of people in most situations (I'm assuming you have an APS-C size DSLR). The 28-135 won't go wide enough for a lot of group situations

 

But, you have to decide. If you're doing almost exclusively single person shots and candids from a distance, the 28-135 might be better.

[marcphotography]

If you have a crop sensor it is nice to have the extra wide angle if shooting indoors but it is also nice to have that reach with the 28-135. If you decide on the 28-135 I have a Canon 28-135mm IS for sale. you can e-mail me if interested. a_kraker99@hotmail.com

[cindy_stephenson]

Oh, I forgot to mention, I am useing a Canon 40D

[ken munn]

For me it would be the 17-85. For people shots though, the 28-135 lets you keep your

distance and still get close-up shots.

[ajb2222]

I fyou are mostly indoors and don't have the short range covered by another lens I would get the 17-85. otherwise the 28-135 would let you stand off a little more and still get the shot.

[steve_dunn2]

<p>The 28-135 is rather a good lens, so if you're looking for a normal-to-tele zoom, it's well worth considering. Or if you were looking for a general-purpose lens for a film body; after all, that's what the 28-135 was intended to be when it was introduced. But if your idea of everyday includes anything on the wide side, the 28-135 won't do the job on your 1.6-crop body.</p>

[cindy_stephenson]

I already have the 17-85 as well as a 70-200. Just wondering if it would benefit me to add the 28-135 to my team?

[erictomenga]

I have the 28-135mm IS on a 30D as my everyday lens and if your talking indoor use I wish I had the wider 17-85mm but when I'm outdoors I welcome the 135mm end.

[songtsen]

<p><i>"I already have the 17-85 as well as a 70-200. Just wondering if it would benefit me to add the 28-135 to my team?"</i></p>

 

<p>I wonder why you would need the 28-135 if you have 17-200 covered already - perhaps your 70-200 is a non-IS version. In that case, wouldn't something like the 55-250 IS be a better choice than the 28-135?</p>

[cindy_stephenson]

No, my 70-200 not IS version. I was just curious between a 17-85 vs a 28-135 which would be a better all around everyday shooting lens as my 70-200 is a little heavier.

[anders_carlsson]

Only to state the obvious: you might want to look at the 50/1.8 prime as an addition rather than another zoom. Not as flexible of course, but you'll have great fun playing with depth of field. Sharp glass too.

[correct_exposure]

Interesting indeed. I would keep the 70-200 and sell the 17-85 and buy the 17-55 because of it's speed and IS. It's the best lens Canon makes for crop bodies. And it gives you much more versatility for low light shooting indoors or out.

 

Just a thought...

[victor_kunkel2]

I'm quite happy with the 17 - 85 IS. It has decent reach so distance can be kept to a large degree. The short end isn't as bad as many thing and can be cleaned up in processing. You'd lose that if you went to the longer zoom you are considering. I have longer Tamron zooms from my film days that perform well, but I don't like changing lenses often, so the 17 - 85 is a nice compromise for me and is used 90% of the time. I do a lot of outdoor stuff and much of that is in the wind off the ocean so changing lenses would get dirt and dust where it is not my friend.

[steve_dunn2]

<cite>I was just curious between a 17-85 vs a 28-135 which would be a better all around everyday shooting lens as my 70-200 is a little heavier.</cite>

 

<p>You already have this range covered, so you're in the best position to answer this question. What focal lengths do you use most often? How often do you use the wide end of the 17-85 vs. how often do you find yourself wishing it went longer?</p>

[William Michael]

>I was just curious between a 17-85 vs a 28-135 which would be a better all around everyday shooting lens as my 70-200 is a little heavier.<

 

All else aside, 17 to 28 is more important than 85 to 135 for `everyday` on an APS-C body: I think this becomes the major criterion.

 

WW

[pmind]

I would like to second the idea of using a 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4, your choice. They're both light weight and pretty darn sharp. You also have the advantage of being able to shoot bats in a cave when used wide open. That being said, I would lean towards the 17-85mm.