rebel xt lense

[aquafamily]

Any suggestions for an all around lense for my rebel xt camera??

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Sigma 18-125 for about US$230

 

[NJDad18]

Kelly,

2 things that should happen.

1. You should get a commission from Sigma.

2. There should be a sticky about an all around lens for WDW. This question seems to come up on a regular basis.

 

[Metallicat]

I'm also looking for a good quality all around lens for my XT. what do you think about the Canon EF 24-100mm f/4.OL IS lens? yes, I know its pricey, but I know the L lenses are better, plus I think the IS would be good for hand held shots.
any thoughts on this lens? Thanks! Linda

 

[Kelly Grannell]

it's not wide enough. If you want IS, I strongly recommend 17-55 f/2.8 IS.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Kelly,

2 things that should happen.

1. You should get a commission from Sigma.

2. There should be a sticky about an all around lens for WDW. This question seems to come up on a regular basis.

1. I really should, shouldn't I?

2. Yeah, but it's only a one liner, so maybe it's not worth sticky-ing it. What do you think? Should I ask Mr Moderator to make a sticky and I create the one liner with sample pics of that lens?

 

[NJDad18]

Call the sticky walk around lens for DSLR. Maybe you can even pose with the lens too.

 

[ndelaware]

Sorry Kelly, not trying to pick a fight, but I have used my Canon 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS all over WDW and never found it not to be wide enough. I don't even bother to take anything wider to the parks anymore.

 

[JR6ooo4]

Same here. 28-135 IS is my walk-around. Many people need a lense wider but many also need a 400mm and more which I don't have. How much do you realy loose. 10%?

Mikeeee

 

[Kelly Grannell]

well, put it this way.

There is no way I can take these shots without the 17mm

 

[boBQuincy]

I'm also looking for a good quality all around lens for my XT. what do you think about the Canon EF 24-100mm f/4.OL IS lens? yes, I know its pricey, but I know the L lenses are better, plus I think the IS would be good for hand held shots.
any thoughts on this lens? Thanks! Linda

I have a 24-105 and use it for maybe 95+% of my photos. This lens is more than good quality, it's very, very good (and pricey). If you can live without the IS Canon's 24-85 is also very sharp but not built as well as the 24-105.
The IS really helps for low light as long as the subject is not moving. It also drains the batteries if, like me, you tend to hold the shutter button half pressed for some time while waiting for the shot.

I don't seem to miss the wide angle much but Kelly certainly would, it's a difference in photography style. At WDW it is not always possible to get everything in the frame. If you find yourself backing up for shots and still running out of room, you should choose the wider lens.


boB

 

[0bli0]

as Steve points out, the 28-135 is a fantastic walk-around lens and very much worth the money. on a 1.6 crop body, 28 is not nearly wide enough so you may also carry a wide angle lens in your bag.

the Sigma 18-125 gives you some extra room at the wide end without barrel distortion, and is nicely sharp for a consumer lens.

 

[Mellie0119]

I'm using the 28-135 IS as my walkaround lens and have the kit lens (18-55) in my bag if I need a bit more room. That is until DH drops a bunch of money on something silly and I get a nice wide angle lens without having him gripe at me.

 

[Metallicat]

Thanks everybody. I think it would be wide enough. if not, I can always back up a little bit. my DD has the Canon 17-40 L and if it had the IS feature I would buy it in a heartbeat. I want wide angle, quality of a L lens, and the IS feature. this would be the closest I could get to all three. wouldn't it?