Which lens/ lens combination - Canon 60D body

[kylieh]

WWYD: For about $100 difference, both within my budget - these are Australian $$, don't panic! I have a Canon 60D.

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 $1388 (3 stops of IS?)

or

Sigma Lens 30mm f/1.4 $425, and
Canon Lens 15-85mm EF-S f/3.5-5.6 IS USM $828 - (4 stops of IS?)

I'm thinking the 2nd option may give more more versatility, but I'm not sure! I'm planning on the 17-55 or 15-85 to be my "everyday" lens. I do like taking photos at night.

Any thoughts?

 

[photo_chick]

I'd go with the 15-85 and Sigma 30 myself.

 

[alloyd1170]

I'd go with #2 also. I like the idea of having a bit wider angle and more reach than the first option. The Sigma at f1.4 will help with the night shots, but doesn't give you the option to zoom in and out (which I prefer). Plus you get 2 vs 1 lens....can never have too many lenses!

 

[boufa]

I disagree. Depending on how much you would use the long end. I would go with option 1. It is a fast piece of glass throughout the entire range. Sure the 30mm is very fast, but the 18-55 likely has a speed drop off pretty quick though the zoom range. I guarantee that at 55mm the 17-55 is faster than the 18-85 at 55mm.

Someone said you cannot have too many lenses, and that is false also, especially for Disney. You can spend a lot of time changing lenses rather than enjoying yourself or taking pictures. Plus you have to carry them.

 

[PrincessInOz]

Kylie - I love my 17 - 55 mm f/2.8. It's almost permanently on my (camera) body. Takes nice pictures and gives me the ability to take low light photos. Do you have the opportunity to buy it in the US and/or have it delivered?

 

[kylieh]

Thanks everyone - it is certainly a toss up. For managing multiple lenses I'm leaning towards the 17-55. It's just too hard!

Kylie - I love my 17 - 55 mm f/2.8. It's almost permanently on my (camera) body. Takes nice pictures and gives me the ability to take low light photos. Do you have the opportunity to buy it in the US and/or have it delivered?

PIO - I was hoping to get it before we go, DD's birthday party in two weeks would be good practice, indoors at at party place, they girls are making cupcakes and lip gloss! Ryda has it for $1388 (Canon Australia stock/warranty). The price from B&H is US$1187 inc UPS or FedEx postage + as it's one of those two I'll probably get hit for $110+ duty on the way in. For a small price difference I'd get it locally.

Though I have seen it on the Sydney grey market for around $1200.

 

[PrincessInOz]

Just remember that unlike Canon camera bodies, Canon lenses have an international warranty. So it makes little or no difference where you pick up a Canon lens from.

I got mine in the US and paid a touch under $1100 for it. It was on sale at my favourite camera store in Silicon Valley where no sales tax applied and there was a $50 Canon rebate as well. Exchange rate of close to 1:1 at the time.

And for what it's worth - except for Animal Kingdom, I rarely wanted more reach than the 55 mm at the World.
There were the odd occassions that I went round MK shooting with the 55 - 250 mm kit lens for close up detail....but that was deliberate on my part and I used more zoom reach than 85 mm.

Good luck with the decision.

 

[mom2rtk]

I'm not familiar with the 15-85 option. But I have the 17-55 and can say that once you get past the price thing........ you will absolutely fall in love with this lens. You can click on the link in my signature for my December 2010 trip report. 90% of the photos in that report were taken with this lens. It's on my camera (at Disney AND at home) the vast majority of the time.

I have the T2i and the great performance of this camera at high ISO's combined with constant 2.8 gave me a LOT of flexibility to walk into different lighting situations all day without needing to change lenses.

 

[bob100]

WWYD: For about $100 difference, both within my budget - these are Australian $$, don't panic! I have a Canon 60D.

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 $1388 (3 stops of IS?)

or

Sigma Lens 30mm f/1.4 $425, and
Canon Lens 15-85mm EF-S f/3.5-5.6 IS USM $828 - (4 stops of IS?)

I'm thinking the 2nd option may give more more versatility, but I'm not sure! I'm planning on the 17-55 or 15-85 to be my "everyday" lens. I do like taking photos at night.

Any thoughts?

the Cannon 17-55 is the top of the line for f2.8 zooms but take a look at the new Sigma 17-50 2.8 EX DC OS HSM - it has the same good reviews as the Canon but cost much less
www.photozone.de

 

[GrumpyGoat]

the Cannon 17-55 is the top of the line for f2.8 zooms but take a look at the new Sigma 17-50 2.8 EX DC OS HSM - it has the same good reviews as the Canon but cost much less
www.photozone.de

I'm going to have to disagree with this statement... The 17-55, while a good lens, is an EF-S lens which means it only fits the XXD and Rebel series cameras. Also, in my opinion, it's overpriced for a lens of this type...

With that statement, you have eliminated every Canon L Series lens, including the fine 24-70 f2.8, 16-35 f2.8 and of course the 70-200 f2.8 IS L, arguable Canon's finest zoom lens.

Even though I have three bodies that will accept EF-S lenses, I have stayed away from them because I don't want to limit my lenses to only a few of Canon's DSLR bodies. There may come a time in the future when I might want to get one of the 5D cameras or move up to a Series 1 body...

 

[bob100]

I'm going to have to disagree with this statement... The 17-55, while a good lens, is an EF-S lens which means it only fits the XXD and Rebel series cameras. Also, in my opinion, it's overpriced for a lens of this type...

With that statement, you have eliminated every Canon L Series lens, including the fine 24-70 f2.8, 16-35 f2.8 and of course the 70-200 f2.8 IS L, arguable Canon's finest zoom lens.

Even though I have three bodies that will accept EF-S lenses, I have stayed away from them because I don't want to limit my lenses to only a few of Canon's DSLR bodies. There may come a time in the future when I might want to get one of the 5D cameras or move up to a Series 1 body...

the time may come .... or it may not.
the crop type lens actually fit the vast majority of DSLR models (see sales statistics) and on a crop body they can be sharper with better image resolution that a lens designed for full frame models !
incredible !
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=2

 

[Anewman]

I'm going to have to disagree with this statement... The 17-55, while a good lens, is an EF-S lens which means it only fits the XXD and Rebel series cameras. Also, in my opinion, it's overpriced for a lens of this type...

In my opinion it is an L quality lens with a EF-S mount... What body I may or may not buy in the future matters not if it delivers that quality today. Overpriced? sure

But back onto original topic.

I would go with option 2, more range and the nice prime.

 

[kylieh]

Decisions... decisions.... thanks everyone. Very difficult to work out!

 

[C&B Young]

WWYD: For about $100 difference, both within my budget - these are Australian $$, don't panic! I have a Canon 60D.

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 $1388 (3 stops of IS?)
or
Sigma Lens 30mm f/1.4 $425, and
Canon Lens 15-85mm EF-S f/3.5-5.6 IS USM $828 - (4 stops of IS?)

Any thoughts?

I'm a big fan of the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. However, I'd pair it with the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 which is on my camera 75% of the time. I've got the non-IS version (around $525 AU) and love it, although there is an IS version available too (around $725 AU).

 

[mom2rtk]

I'm a big fan of the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. However, I'd pair it with the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 which is on my camera 75% of the time. I've got the non-IS version (around $525 AU) and love it, although there is an IS version available too (around $725 AU).

I've heard lots of people say they were very happy with that lens. But I've also read a number of reports that it lost some of its sharpness when they added the IS to it. That's how I ended up with the Canon. I wanted IS, but wanted something really sharp. And I don't know if they have made an upgrades, but the focus motor was also really loud on at least the non-IS version.

 

[C&B Young]

I've heard lots of people say they were very happy with that lens. But I've also read a number of reports that it lost some of its sharpness when they added the IS to it. That's how I ended up with the Canon. I wanted IS, but wanted something really sharp. And I don't know if they have made an upgrades, but the focus motor was also really loud on at least the non-IS version.

There been a ton of debate on the sharpness of the VC vs. non-VC versions of the lens. I think it almost falls into the same category as Sigma having focal issues - it's something that's almost an urban legend by this point, with somewhat questionable truth to it. However, if I was going with a stabilized lens I'd absolutely take the Canon hands-down for the ultrasonic motor - the Tamron sounds like an angry hornets' nest!

 

[mom2rtk]

There been a ton of debate on the sharpness of the VC vs. non-VC versions of the lens. I think it almost falls into the same category as Sigma having focal issues - it's something that's almost an urban legend by this point, with somewhat questionable truth to it. However, if I was going with a stabilized lens I'd absolutely take the Canon hands-down for the ultrasonic motor - the Tamron sounds like an angry hornets' nest!

LOL! That you should mention the Sigma legend too. I'm about to pack my Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 off with my camera to calibrate the lens. It has a most decided front focus issue.

 

[kylieh]

Thanks everyone for your help. It's taken me this long to make up my mind.

I have ordered today the...

Canon EFS 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens. I will have it by the end of the week, and try it out this weekend, properly at DD's birthday party in another week, then take it away.

 

[mom2rtk]

Thanks everyone for your help. It's taken me this long to make up my mind.

I have ordered today the...

Canon EFS 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens. I will have it by the end of the week, and try it out this weekend, properly at DD's birthday party in another week, then take it away.

I don't think you'll regret that choice. The most expensive lens is one you buy twice (because you settled for less than what you really wanted the first time). I toiled over this decision myself, then never looked back.

Enjoy! And be sure to come back and post some pics from the party later!

 

[Bstanley]

What fun!

I wrestled with the cost of this rascal myself, but it really does a beautiful job. Now that I've had it for awhile it would be a toss-up whether I would fight harder to hold onto it or my 70-200mm F4L - and that is saying a lot.

Ohh - don't forget to order a lens hood - you would think Canon could cough up a lens hood for the price but they don't.

The only downside to this gadget is that there is no way you can blame the lens any more