Canon Lens Question

[Diana]

I am getting ready to purchase a Canon Rebel XTi and, instead of getting the kit lens, I would like to get a basic IS lens to go with the camera body. I am completely unknowledgeable in this matter, so I would like some advice from those of you who are knowledgeable in this area.

I read in another photography forum that some think the Canon 17-85/4.0-5.6 EF-S IS is a good replacement.

What do you think about this lens or do you think there is a better one to start out with?

P.S. I do want an IS lens and one that is good for landscapes and portraits, until I get some experience and can afford more lenses.

Diana

[CalamityJanet]

Hi Diana,

I got the Canon 28-135 IS and I'm really happy with it. The IS really does make a difference.

[jo]

The Canon 28-135 IS is the lens I use most often. But for strolling in the park I use a 75-300 IS lens.

[NMarti]

Diana
I also have the 28-135 IS and it is nice for carrying around. It is a bit heavier and larger than the kit lens. I am pretty happy with mine. I love my new 70-200L IS but that's way too much lens to start out with. The 28-135 does really nice portrait shots too.

[Chuck S.]

One more vote for the 28-135 IS. It's my walkaround lens. On either side of it, I have two non-IS lens (17-40L and 70-200L) but they get much less use.

Chuck

[bayhli]

I have the 17-85mm IS and I love it. The extra width for landscapes is really nice.

[mbrant]

There are a number of websites that review and rate lenses. One site that I find helpful is:

www.fredmiranda.com

[Diana]

Thanks everyone for your input. Quite a few of you seem to like the 28-135. I have been Googling like mad and reading about these different lenses. It's mind boggling. Yes, I found that FredMiranda site, thanks, mbrant. I was hoping Lee would check in to see if he has any recommendations.

Diana

[NMarti]

Diana
You might want to read this thread
http://www.photoshopelementsuser.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15945

Lee weighed in on lenses in that one when I asked a while back.

[LeeOtsubo]

...I was hoping Lee would check in to see if he has any recommendations.

Hi Diana,
You have to put, "Hey Lee, Read this, ya dummy!" in the subject line if you want to be sure I read it. By the time I saw this thread, there were several replies so I just skipped it.

I've never used the 17-85/4-5.6 IS but every lens has its pros & cons. The 17-85 is equivalent to 27-136 on a 1.6 crop factor camera. That's always been a very popular range. That's why the 28-135 was such a popular lens in the film days.

On the downside, it's an EF-S lens which means it can only be used on certain cameras. That's why you won't find any pros using EF-S lenses. If you intend to keep the XTi as your primary camera for the foreseeable future, that's probably not a problem. Be aware that EF-S lenses may not have the same resale value as an EF lens.

The 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS is a fine lens. I have one and use it regularly. BUT, on an XTi, it is equivalent to a 45-216, not wide enough in many situations. Whenever I have my 28-135 on my camera, I also have my 17-40 nearby. HTH

Nancy - How do you remember these threads from a gazillion years ago? I'd totally forgotten about that thread when I was in my verbose mode. :D

[Diana]

Thanks, Nancy. I'd still like to see Lee's input on the 17-85 or any other lens he'd recommend as a replacement for the kit 15-55, if he's around later.

Diana

[Diana]

Well, speak of the devil. He was posting while I was reading the other thread. Thanks, Lee.

Diana

[Diana]

After reading more here and other review sites, I'm undecided between the 28-135 and 17-85. I probably won't be upgrading from the XTi any year soon, so the EF-S/resale value of 17-85 probably won't be a problem. What I've been reading says the 28-135 is an older IS technology (if it matters) ??

Lee, are there any other comparable lenses I should be considering for an entry-level lens besides these two? From my reading it appears the 17-85 is good at wide-angle, some zoom and even limited macro, which kind of sounds good to me since I won't have more than one lens for quite a while.

Diana

[LeeOtsubo]

Hi Diana,
I forgot to add that the 18-55 is a good lens and you should consider getting it if you plan to go with something like the 28-135. It doesn't have the same build quality as the 28-135 but, optically, it's a good lens and would make an excellent companion to the 28-135. Both are EF lenses so you won't have the EF-S issues of the 17-85.

[Diana]

This poll was interesting to read:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=229

[poll comments here: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=56747]

Per this vote, the 28-135 came in 2nd and 17-85 3rd. The 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 came 1st, but doesn't appear to be IS.

Diana

[LeeOtsubo]

After reading more here and other review sites, I'm undecided between the 28-135 and 17-85. I probably won't be upgrading from the XTi any year soon, so the EF-S/resale value of 17-85 probably won't be a problem. What I've been reading says the 28-135 is an older IS technology (if it matters) ??

Lee, are there any other comparable lenses I should be considering for an entry-level lens besides these two? From my reading it appears the 17-85 is good at wide-angle, some zoom and even limited macro, which kind of sounds good to me since I won't have more than one lens for quite a while.

Diana

The 17-85 IS is just a bit faster than the older first generation IS on the 28-135. It's not the latest 3rd generation IS that has Mode I & II. From that perspective, I don't think there's much difference in the IS. Both also feature the ring-style USM instead of the older micromotor USM so that provides FTM (Full Time Manual) focusing which lets you override the AF at anytime.

It's difficult to recommend a lens without knowing more about a person's style, interests, skill level, needs and budget. Bottom line, one of the most useful attributes of any dSLR is the flexibility to change lenses as needed.

Personally, I would buy the 18-55 kit lens and add the 28-135 but, if you're sure you won't upgrade the body anytime soon, the 17-85 would be a reasonable choice. HTH

ps - IS is not needed or useful for shorter focal lengths. The Canon 50/1.8 is one of their sharpest and best value lenses. Keep in mind that opinions (and polls) on the Internet are like belly buttons, everyone has one and they're fun but add no real value to life.

[Diana]

Thanks, Lee. There is so much to think about before I lay that money down!:)

Diana

[NMarti]

Nancy - How do you remember these threads from a gazillion years ago? I'd totally forgotten about that thread when I was in my verbose mode. :D


Lee - I have no life. :rolleyes: :D

[tdhopkins]

I have the 28-135mm that seems so popular in this thread and the 50mm 1.8. I recommend them both! You're right that the 50mm doesn't have IS but I really don't think you need it on that lens. And although it feels a little cheap with it's plastic construction, it actually takes really sharp photos with very nice bokeh.

[Diana]

Thanks, everyone, for your input. I really appreciate it.

Diana