Specific Lens for 50D beyond 10-22 Search

[kathy_vidal1]

<p>I am currently living outside of the US and will need to wait to purchase my lenses once I get back home for a visit. I have ordered the Canon 50D and have done enough research to know that the type of lens that would best suit my interests is the 10-22 for landscape. However, I know that I am limiting myself with this lens and I would like to supplement it with a lens that will be versatile in my travels. I have over 15 countries on my agenda in the next 4 years and I really want a lens to add that will help me capture extremely high quality photos. From what I understand, you really trade quality for range, so I want something that is better in quality as opposed to a wide range. Outside of landscape and travel photography, I would want a lens that would allow me to shoot indoor/outdoor, people and architecture. Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated. I don't know much about equipment and it is unfortunate that I will need to purchase prior to playing around with the camera and taking courses, but it's my only option due to my location! Thanks!</p>

[phule]

<p>Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS.<br>

If you'd like more versatility, I'd pick the Canon 15-85 IS</p>

[jim_j2]

<p>I'm with Rob, but I wouldn't get above the f/2.8, of course, anything below f/2.8 gets much bigger and bulky in size.</p>

[lorne_hampel1]

<p>expensive but I love my 24-105 F4 L</p>

[wgpinc]

<p>Take a good look at the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 both the VC version and the lighter and less expensive non VC version. I use the Canon 17-55mm 2.8 lens but have tested the Tamron several times and found it to be as good in most ways and much lighter. Good luck.</p>

[hjoseph7]

"However, I know that I am limiting myself with this lens and I would like to supplement it with a lens that will be versatile in my travels."

 

The 10-22mm is not very versatile other than for wide angle scenarios. If you are traveling, then you might need a longer reach and even a telephoto lens. Since the 50D is a cropped lens camera a 10-22mm lens wouldl be the equivalent of a 16-35mm. I would opt for the 24-105mm f4 L series lens, which is light, very sharp and covers a wide degree of angles. I usually take my 28-105 3.5/4.5 non-L series lens on travel, because of its convenience, range and it takes excellent pictures.

[jonsjons]

<p>The 24-105 f/4 would indeed be a great lens to have in terms of range. I'd also consider a normal range f/2.8 zoom as that would give you the option to shoot some nice shallow depth of field portraits as well as landscape stuff. A Canon 24-70 f/2.8 would do this (and complement your 10-22 nicely), but if you want something smaller, lighter, and less expensive consider the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 as well. It's an excellent performer, especially on crop sensor cameras.</p>

[kerry_grim]

<p>"From what I understand, you really trade quality for range, so I want something that is better in quality as opposed to a wide range." ...this is not correct! If you have decided this is the range you want...get the lens. It is excellent quality. A few people say it is not sharp. My guess is they probably don't know how to use it. Others have said it is the equivalent of an L lens. The pictures I have taken with it are stunning.</p>

 

[christian_irgens]

<p>While I love my EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS, particularly when combined with the Sigma 50-150/2.8 II, it would overlap 50 % of the range of the 10-22. I think the 24-105/4 L would be a better complement to the wide zoom, that is if you are still certain you need something wider than 15 mm. I have not tried the 24-105 but it has gotten generally great reviews. Another (cheaper) alternative is the EF 28-135 USM IS which is also very well reviewed and has given me excellent results. At the short end you increase the gap (missing focal lengths) from 2 mm to 6 mm but gain 31 mm at the telephoto end. You should also consider weight/size issues when traveling; L lenses are generally heavier and f: 2.8 lenses even more so.</p>

<p>Chris Irgens</p>

[kathy_vidal1]

<p>Thank you everyone for such wonderful input. I am looking at each of the suggstions and have a question about the Tamron. Do I need an adapter or will I need to factor in any other cost if I purchase a Tamron, or will it attach to the 50D on its own? Thanks!</p>

[jim_j2]

<p>The Tamron, like most "third party lenses" is offered in different mounts, and the Canon EF will not be a problem at all. It will mount on your 50D just as any Canon EF mount lenses would.</p>

<p>You will be fine!</p>

 

[richard_crowe4]

<p>I absolutely love the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens... The focal range is great. I usually don't need a wider lens for most travel and general photography and the constant f/2.8 aperture and IS make this a very viable low light lens. I would assume that the less costly Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 VC would also have these characteristics.</p>

 

[richard_crowe4]

<p>I absolutely love the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens... The focal range is great. I usually don't need a wider lens for most travel and general photography and the constant f/2.8 aperture and IS make this a very viable low light lens. I would assume that the less costly Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 VC would also have these characteristics.</p>

<div></div>

[richard_crowe4]

<p>Sorry that I did not put this info in my previous post but, here is a shot which illustrates the versatility of a zoom with a constant f/2.8 aperture and IS (Tamron calls their version VC).<br>

I was caught on the Kowloon side of Hong Kong Harbor without my tripod. There was nothing against which to brace the camera so I just cranked up the ISO to 1,600 and shot hand-held. I would rather have an image with a bit of noise than an image that suffers from motion blur.<br>

This image was shot at 1/20 second at f/2.8 using ISO 1,600. I cleared it up a bitwith Topaz Adjust 3 DeNoise. I could not have managed this shot without the f/2.8 aperture and IS.</p>