Posted by Jeff Wiebe on October 12, 2006 at 9:42 AM
I need a new wide-ish zoom lens to replace my failing 22-55 USM. I need something that's pretty affordable but still gives decent pictures. I'm sure that statement will envoke a couple "you get what you pay for" responses, and I know that, but I still need suggestions.
Posted by Bill Chambers on October 12, 2006 at 9:58 AM
What brand camera do you have Jeff? I've been looking at the Nikkor 18-200 VR. The reviews I've read have been pretty impressive overall, with the main objections being a pretty strong barrel distortion @ 18mm, but that's easy enough to fix in PS. It's slow @ f/5.6 but I usually shoot at f/11 and focus manually anyway so that's not an issue for me. My primary interest is that it would prevent so many lens changes in the field and the accompanying dust bunnies, etc.
Posted by Jeff Wiebe on October 12, 2006 at 10:09 AM
Sorry I forgot to mention that I'm using a Canon Rebel XT.
Posted by Stacy Egan on October 12, 2006 at 10:14 AM
Canon 17-40 f/4L? Is $670 US affordable to you? I have this lens for my 20D and like it very much. In my portfolio most of the landscape shots were taken with it (some are with my 70-200). Another place to look at example images is: http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_1740_4l.
17-40L is a very good choice. I recently sold mine though. CA is a problem otherwise a fantastic lense. Construction is superb. Another choice is Tokina 12-24.
Posted by Jeff Wiebe on October 12, 2006 at 10:26 AM
Yeah I know the 17-40 is kind of the standard, but I'm not sure I've got that kind of money sitting around. It won't take a pro quality lens to make my old lens look like junk.
Posted by Basil Greber on October 12, 2006 at 10:55 AM
Sigma 17-70, it's a f/2.8-4.0, but that might be wrong. I've heard a lot of good things about that lens (but I've never used it myself).
Check the reviews at www.photozone.de, they usually are spot-on, in my opinion.
Basil
Posted by Mel Ladewig on October 13, 2006 at 7:19 PM
I have a Tokina 28-70 f2.8 AT-X Pro. Its a $250 lens and a great bargain in my opinion. On an XT however, it is a normal - short tele type of lens, not a wide angle lens.
There is also a Canon 28-105 f3.5-4.5 USM II lens for $230. The hood is another $25. It seems to get pretty good reviews for image quality and has USM and full time manual focusing.
Other than that, there are three lenses that would do a better job for wide angle on a crop body as a wider replacement for what you've got.
1) 17-40L
2) Tamron 17-50 f2.8
3) Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4
Sigma also makes an 18-50 f2.8 lens, but the Tamron is the same price and with better image quality.
I also own the Canon 17-40 f4L. I do need the wider focal length for landscape sometimes.
Posted by Glenn Carter on October 13, 2006 at 11:05 PM
Jeff,
I think the new Tamron 17-50 f2.8 is a great lens. It is made for Nikon and Canon. It beats my Nikon 18-70mm for sharpness.
A great non L serie Canon Lens that blows the 17-40 L right out the camera bag. I know because I sold mine to buy the heap of dung that is the 17-40. CA is outragous on the 17-40.......For an L series it must rank even lower than the 100-400
John
Posted by Sean Bolton on October 19, 2006 at 4:57 PM
Hi Jeff
An affordable alternative with similar focal range would be the Canon 20-35 f3.5/f4.5, a decent performer for the money, and can often be picked up relatively cheaply in the used market.
If you want a bit more range, and can sacrifice the wide angle a bit, the 24-85 f3.5/f4.5 is also a decent lens in the price range.
Otherwise the 17-40 F4 L is a superb lens, personally I think the CA issues are overstated, I have used mine for nearly 3 years now on a Canon 300D, 20D, and 5D and not had any issues with CA.
Discussion
10 repliesCheck the reviews at www.photozone.de, they usually are spot-on, in my opinion.
Basil
Eample processed 100% crop from a Rebel XT. link
Example full shot. link 2
There is also a Canon 28-105 f3.5-4.5 USM II lens for $230. The hood is another $25. It seems to get pretty good reviews for image quality and has USM and full time manual focusing.
Other than that, there are three lenses that would do a better job for wide angle on a crop body as a wider replacement for what you've got.
1) 17-40L
2) Tamron 17-50 f2.8
3) Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4
Sigma also makes an 18-50 f2.8 lens, but the Tamron is the same price and with better image quality.
I also own the Canon 17-40 f4L. I do need the wider focal length for landscape sometimes.
I think the new Tamron 17-50 f2.8 is a great lens. It is made for Nikon and Canon. It beats my Nikon 18-70mm for sharpness.
Glenn
A great non L serie Canon Lens that blows the 17-40 L right out the camera bag. I know because I sold mine to buy the heap of dung that is the 17-40. CA is outragous on the 17-40.......For an L series it must rank even lower than the 100-400
John
An affordable alternative with similar focal range would be the Canon 20-35 f3.5/f4.5, a decent performer for the money, and can often be picked up relatively cheaply in the used market.
Photozone 20-35 review link
If you want a bit more range, and can sacrifice the wide angle a bit, the 24-85 f3.5/f4.5 is also a decent lens in the price range.
Otherwise the 17-40 F4 L is a superb lens, personally I think the CA issues are overstated, I have used mine for nearly 3 years now on a Canon 300D, 20D, and 5D and not had any issues with CA.
cheers
Sean