Everyday All Purpose Lens for XTi

[eric_chang3]

I'm in the market for a new everyday all purpose lens for my Rebel XTi. I was

thinking of the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM as my next piece of glass. This is

where I need help, I don't know if I have the right concept when it comes to

choosing lenses.

 

The reason I want this specific piece of glass is because it has the largest

focal length range and aperture range within my budget range ($500). Thus

allowing me to experiment with different kinds of shots. I assuming because of

the wide focal and aperture range it is a "do more" lens. Do I have the right

concept of choosing a general purpose lens?

 

I know the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM is a highly recommended everyday general

purpose lens, but I feel like the smaller focal range and fixed aperture limits

my photo freedom.

 

This piece of glass won't be my last. It's just my general purpose, so I can

figure out what kind of photography I want to get into. Then I will move into

the specific lenses, like telephoto, wide angle, etc.

[bobatkins]

"I know the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM is a highly recommended everyday general purpose lens, but I feel like the smaller focal range and fixed aperture limits my photo freedom"

 

"Fixed aperture" - what fixed aperture? f2.8 is the maximum aperture, not the ONLY aperture!

[eric_chang3]

I'm confused. I don't mean to challenge your integrity. As I mentioned earlier, I'm still new to photography. I read another review that reads, "The Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens, with a fast, fixed f/2.8 aperture"

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-f-2.8-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

It's in the first sentence.

[brian_hutchison2]

Fixed aperture means you can use that aperture throughout the zoom range (from 17mm to 55mm). It does not mean you *have* to. Its sometimes called constant aperture. You are not the first to be confused by this.

 

The 28-135mm is not the same -- you can only use the f/3.5 aperture at the wide end. If you zoom it out, you'll be at f/5.6.

 

Having the fixed/constant aperture *available* to you is a very good thing.

[david_gobeil]

"Fixed Aperture" in this case simply means you can maintain a wide-open aperture of f/2.8 throughout the zoom range.

 

For example a cheaper lens might have a "variable aperture" range from f/3.5 to f/6.3 when zooming from 17mm to 85mm, with f/3.5 only available near the wider angles and f/6.3 only available at the longer angles.

[eric_chang3]

Ahhhhh I see. Thanks a lot guys. That clears it up a lot!

[tim_klimowicz]

Personally, I wouldn't waste any money on a lens that doesn't have a fixed aperture.

Nothing is more frustrating than zooming from, say, 17mm at f/4 to 85mm and having the

camera automatically adjust the aperture to the new max of f/5.6, which then "sticks" at

5.6 even when you zoom back out to 17mm. Talk about usability issues....especially when

you haven't got the time to constantly consider the aperture every time you touch the

zoom, doubly especially when you're shooting in manual. UGH.

 

But sorry, my help ends there. :) I know not of a decent zoom lens with a fixed aperture for

$500. I'm sure one exists, I just don't own one.

 

What kind of lens do you currently own for that camera? I still come from the school of

thought that a new photographer can get more out of a fixed focal length lens; that is,

they're forced to consider angles and spatial movement and how it effects composition and

angles, rather than just seeing something interesting, planting their feet, and zooming in to

desired range and taking the picture.

 

With that said, I'm a big, big fan of the Sigma 30mm 1.4 on a cropped-sensor body. It's

under $500, and is quite nice in all conditions, thought I often find myself wishing I had

something just a WEE bit wider.... maybe the Canon 24 1.4L, which goes for approximately

2.5x the price of the Sigma...

[ken schwarz]

Having a fixed maximum aperture was important back in the days of manual metering, when you didn't want to have to adjust your shutter speed when you zoomed. Nowadays, it's hardly that big a deal--unless, of course, you need or want a faster lens on the telephoto end of the range. Unfortunately, f/5.6 at 135mm is pretty slow: far from useless, but limiting in many situations. The 17-55mm range covers a lot of ground, but if it's a fast lens that you want, a prime will do even better and often for less money. The great thing about the 17-55/2.8 is that you can do so much with one lens that you don't need to carry another or change lenses for different effects.

[ken schwarz]

Tim: I'm not sure which body you are using with your zoom, but on the 30D with the 10-22mm/3.5-4.5, the aperture doesn't "stick" at f/4.5 when I zoom in and out on aperture priority. The body seems to keep track of the aperture I want and gives the the closest available on the telephoto end. Maybe your body and lens behave differently? I agree that if it did that it would be a major usability issue.

[eric_chang3]

Re: Tim Klimowicz

"What kind of lens do you currently own for that camera?"

I have Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 that comes with the kit. Lucky for me, my camera's aperture doesn't stick when I zoom out.

[mendel_leisk]

"because it has the largest focal length range and aperture range within my budget range"

 

Not necessarily true on the focal length range. Focal length variations are not "linear". The difference between focal length numbers is *much* more significant at the wide end, for example the difference between 16mm and 17mm of Canon's two wide L zooms.

 

Still with zoom range, imho *where* that range is, wide vs telephoto, is more important. The 28-135 has a range tailored for full frame: at 28 it's *barely* into wide territory. Is that what you want? If so, you're set, but if you would like to traverse the wide to long range with an equal amount on each side, the 28-135 would disappoint.

 

From what you've said, I think the Canon 17-85 would be a good fit, for the interm.

[anov]

"Nothing is more frustrating than zooming from, say, 17mm at f/4 to 85mm and having the camera automatically adjust the aperture to the new max of f/5.6, which then "sticks" at 5.6 even when you zoom back out to 17mm"

 

Really? Worse than rotating focus? Worse than zoom barrell that won't stay put? ;)

 

What don't you like about the kit lens? The IS version of that lens has newer formula that is said to be pretty good plus it has IS.

 

That 28-135mm is a decent lens but hardly a walk around everyday lens on a cropped body such as the XTi.

[eric_chang3]

Re: Mendel Leisk

 

"From what you've said, I think the Canon 17-85 would be a good fit, for the interm."

You bring up a good point. It seems like most wide angle lens are in the 14-24 range. But at the same time the 17-85 has a min of f/4.0. Tricky trade off, I am clueless as to which one I should choose.

 

 

 

Re: A Novisto

 

"That 28-135mm is a decent lens but hardly a walk around everyday lens on a cropped body such as the XTi."

Can you explain more, I don't really understand and I'm all ears.

[james_gu]

Your EF-S 18-55 is a fairly good every day general purpose lens. I may be misreading, but from your description, it seems that you haven't used the lens too much. Am I right? If that's the case, I would recommend using it a bit more, and find out why you want to switch to a new lens. Make a list of situations you may be using your lens, and list of effects you want to achieve, then we can suggest a list of features that may be suitable. Until then, you should probably hold on to your cash.

 

Others may disagree with me on this, but I wouldn't recommend the EF-S17-85, even though it has a very nice focal range and IS. From my experience, its performance is not stellar by any means, and under certain conditions, not as good as the 18-55.

[William Michael]

Referring to the OP`s question and applying first principles:

 

What lens do you have at the moment?

 

What are the limitations of your lens, in you opinion?

 

What is it not allowing you to experiment with?

 

If you do indeed have the 18 to 55 and you think you want to play with a short telephoto: have you considered the EF100F2.8 macro: with the18 to 55 kit, what a versatile set you will have to experiment with then?

 

To answer your direct question:

 

` This is where I need help, I don't know if I have the right concept when it comes to choosing lenses.`

 

No. IMO your thinking (on the basis of what has been presented so far) is flawed.

 

You need to address the questions above, first and work from there: at present it seems to me you might be spinning your wheels just looking for a (cheap) replacement to what you already have which might not give you much more scope at all.

 

 

***

 

Referring to the `variable aperture` `fixed aperture`:

 

A zoom with a varyING maximum aperture across the zoom range, IMO is still a pain in the neck, no matter what type of metering etc, and not just because the telephoto end is usually slow, anyway.

 

It is just another issue to maintain in the brain. Using Av at critical HH shutter speeds, is just one example.

 

A fixed (or constant) maximum aperture lens, across the zoom range, is IMO, far more preferable, even though we have in camera meters and high tech gismos.

 

WW

[digitmstr]

FIXED aperture as opposed to VARIABLE aperture.

 

CONSTANT would be a better term perhaps but...I think FIXED is the standard usage....

[tim_klimowicz]

Wow, I'm not sure what lens/body combo I used where this was a factor, but I'm

almost positive it's happened to me. Maybe it was on my girlfriend's 20D with the 18-

85 kit lens?

 

And just to make sure I'm being clear, you can still change the aperture when you

zoom back out, of course, but I thought I remembered it keeping at 5.6 until you

actually spun the wheel to open the aperture again after zooming back out.

 

I wonder if different shooting mode have anything to do with it (I can see how it

would stick in manual, but maybe not in aperture priority?), or if I'm just an idiot. :)

[William Michael]

It seems I prompted your comment, Giampi, and I am unsure of the points you are making, but let me explain my previous comment more fully.

 

I agree that `fixed` is more standard usage now: `constant` is an older term.

 

In regards to `variable`, that too is in standard usage now, but my use of `varyING` was not just using the older term, but was quite purposeful.

 

Let me explain why I wrote the above `ING` in capitals:

 

I wrote `varING` to emphasise that it is indeed a VARYING maximum aperture across the zoom range, (and IMO still the correct method of referring to these types of zoom lenses)

 

Rationale:

 

As these types of lenses are zoomed and if set to the maximum aperture at the wide (which is usually the largest), the aperture VARIES: therefore it is VARYING.

 

Variable means: `able to be varied`, but not necessarily that it does so.

 

Pedantic, but accurate, IMO.

 

And, IMO one of those times when accuracy is necessary as it is descriptive and important.

 

WW

[geoffm]

The answer to the semantics is to insert the word "maximum"

 

All of my camera lenses have variable apertures - they wouldn't be much use to me if they didn't! I don't own a mirror lens - these do have fixed apertures. My microscope lenses have fixed apertures, but these are such special purpose beasts that we don't even call them lenses ("objectives")!

 

To avoid being misunderstood simply say "fixed/constant/variable <maximum> aperture"

 

I'd love to put that in italics, but I don't know how!

[William Michael]

> The answer to the semantics is to insert the word "maximum" [ . . .] To avoid being misunderstood simply say "fixed/constant/variable `maximum` aperture <

 

No, in my opinion, not entirely the answer to the semantics:

 

I did use the word `maximum`, and I agree that word is necessary also.

 

And I agree that, all my camera lenses, (well all but one to be absolutely accurate), have variABLE apertures, that is `able to be varied`.

 

But, I think my point still might be missed, in regard to these particular types of zoom lenses with a varyING maximum aperture:

 

The subtlety I am differentiating is that these types of zoom lenes, when set at their maximum aperture and then zoomed, change their maximum aperture, without regard to an intended action by the photographer hence it: `varies`.

 

i.e. it is as a RESULT of the zooming, that the maximum aperture varies, the two actions are LINKED.

 

Variable just means it `can be varied`, it does not make the linkage between the two actions, where the act of zooming creates the change in the maximum aperture.

 

But the sentence: `varyING maximum aperture across the zoom range` does create that linkage between the two actions of the maximum aperture varying as the lens is zoomed.

 

It is the linkage between the two actions (zooming and the maximum aperture changing) that is unique to this type of zoom lens, and IMO, it should be properly described as such, if we want absolute clarity and zero confusion.

 

PS: I was not SHOUTING but just using capitals for emphasis.

 

Nor am I wishing to start an argument about correct English Usage.

 

After reading the last few comments, I perhaps did not explain the subtle point I was making quite well enough: and I think it an important enough distinction and description, to explain it differently.

 

WW

[sai]

I wouldn't go for the 28-135mm. In you Xti it would be a 45-216. the long end is great but 45mm is hardly a wide angle.

I was in the same place as you are and decided to get the 17-85 IS USM. It's basically the same lens on a crop sensor camera as the XTi.

Great lens in my opinion, very versatile, good sizes and weight. The IS is amazing and so is the IQ.

[DickArnold]

This thread is a great example of how to induce convolution and confusion into the answers to a simple question from a beginner.. I agree with simon as his answer was on the subject and direct. Bob Atkins simple answer was enough on fixed aperture as the ensuing discussion was not responsive to the orignial question. Eric the answer to your second question is that on the XTi the camera thinks the image is 1.6 times larger than what the lens presents to film cameras and some higher priced digital cameras . Therefore, there will be times that the XTi cannot capture the scene you want because you cannot back up far enough to get all of what you want in the frame. A 17-85 will allow you to stand much closer than the 28-135 and yet allow you some degree of magnification at the 85 end. It is, as Simon says, IMO the right choice, however I would work with the 18-55 until you can form your own opinion about whether those focal lengths work for you. The IS. however, will allow more room for eliminating movement error.

[bill_morrow1]

Tamron 18-250. No it's not an L Series, and I'm not saying it is--but for

"everyday/general/walkaround" shots, it ain't bad. Quality is good, and when you want that shot...NOW....it does the job, and I think rather well.

Vacations come to mind quickly, especially if you're flying.

[tdigi]

IMO unless your going with Canons high end lenses I think you get much more for your

money with Tamron. I had the 28-135 and I was not impressed. Most Canon zoom

lenses in the $200 to $500 range are to slow, at least for my taste. I would get a

Tamron 17-50 or a 28-75. Both are 2.8. I also hear a lot of good things about the

Tamron 28 - 300 which is a little slower but has IS built in. Great vacation lens.

 

For Primes I do like Canons lowerpriced 28 1.8 50 1.4 and 100mm macro.

[i._l.]

Another vote for NOT to spend any money on another lens, for now.

 

Keep shooting with your kit lens and pay attention to what focus length you use/like most. It will be helpful to come up with a wish-list based on the way you use the kit lens.

 

At the same time, read more posts on this forum and learn more on photography in general.