# Which lens should I buy for all around shooting



## piotrekhc (Sep 12, 2015)

Hi 

Recently i bought my 1st dslr canon 50d, and now I'm looking to get a new lens.
I had few lenses in mind but I just cant decide. For example Canon 17-40mmf/4l was my 1st choice good price but apparently it does not perform well on crop cameras, and lack of IS puts me of. So there is Sigma Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM but it is massive, and I just don't know, also lack of IS. Finally my 3rd choice Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L but is a bit pricey.
So my question is which would be best suitable lens for general use a bit of landscape some pictures of my cat portraits etc.

Thanks 

Pete


----------



## kaihp (Sep 12, 2015)

piotrekhc said:


> Recently i bought my 1st dslr canon 50d, and now I'm looking to get a new lens.
> I had few lenses in mind but I just cant decide. For example Canon 17-40mmf/4l was my 1st choice good price but apparently it does not perform well on crop cameras, and lack of IS puts me of. So there is Sigma Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM but it is massive, and I just don't know, also lack of IS. Finally my 3rd choice Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L but is a bit pricey.
> So my question is which would be best suitable lens for general use a bit of landscape some pictures of my cat portraits etc.



Congrats on the 50D, it's a nice camera.

My first L-lens was a 17-40L and I used it a lot on both my 10D and 50D bodies. While I did had to have it adjusted at one point, I've never noticed that it was supposed to "not perform well on crop cameras". I believe it's a bit weak in the corners, but that is a FF problem 
I swapped it for a 16-35/4L IS and yes, it's more pricey, but has IS and is optically better out to the edge which my 5D3 likes.


----------



## RobertG. (Sep 12, 2015)

For a crop body the EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 would be my lens of choice. I use this lens for 6 years already and can still recommend it. The EF-S 15-85mm would be a worth a look, too.


----------



## Meatcurry (Sep 12, 2015)

I would go for the 15-85, very sharp and the widest EFS lens bar actual wide angel lens. Also worth picking up the 50mm STM


----------



## sootzzs (Sep 12, 2015)

Meatcurry said:


> I would go for the 15-85, very sharp and the widest EFS lens bar actual wide angel lens. Also worth picking up the 50mm STM



I totally agree. I use my 15-85 for almost 4 years on my 60D and while it is not a lens you could compare to 24-70 II for example, it is a great all around performer on crop. I is not as great in low light though as the aperture closes quickly as you zoom in (F3.5 max is also not that great). I would add the excellent new 50 1.8 STM and the 55-250 STM to add some reach quite cheaply (I have the older version of it and it is a remarkable lens for the price). If you shoot mostly in low light EF-S 17-55 2.8 is of course you best choice. 

Roman.


----------



## mb66energy (Sep 12, 2015)

landscape + cat(s):
My first lens with the EOS 20D was the EF-S 60 macro. I really like it for landscape (germany, full of grid poles and wires, wind energy converters ... ) to cut out the best parts of it and I like to get close ...

EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro:
o.k., no zoom, no IS but f/2.8, but: reasonable fast AF with manual override, stellar IQ (except strong vignetting at f/2.8 and f/4.0 for greater distances), compact, fully internal focusing.
Beware: Not compatible with FF cameras ...

EF 24-105 f/4.0 L IS USM - another option:
Not as wide as the lenses you mentioned but gives you more flexibility on the tele end, sometimes important for "spoiled" landscapes and gives you more reach for animal shots, always helpful!
And it is compatible with FF cameras.
I don't have it because I would like a 40-200 zoom for both, APS-C and FF and still waiting what happens.


After "upgrading" to a 5D classic I enjoy my older 100mm macro (USM but no IS). It is my walkaround camera.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Sep 12, 2015)

piotrekhc said:


> Hi
> 
> Recently i bought my 1st dslr canon 50d, and now I'm looking to get a new lens.
> 
> ...



Hi Pete, had a 50D for many years, still a nice and robust camera. It's AF system is simple but very fast. Looks like you prefer wide angle, IS, and a not to big and heavy lens. So if you do not plan to switch to full frame in future, lenses for the crop sensor (EF-S) should be a better choice for you.

Besides Canon's 15-85mm I'd recommend to check whether Canon's EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 or Sigma's 17-70mm f/2.8-4.0 might suit you.

I have an EF-S 17-55mm/2.8, unfortunately a 1st generation dust pump. I heard that Canon fixed this issue with newer copies. This Canon zoom is a mixed bag: very good IS, fast and reliable AF, fast aperture f/2.8 from 17-55mm gives you a lot freedom of composition, in particular it is nice for portraits isolated from background. That's really a big feature of such fast lenses. Cons are a mediocre optical resolution, but still good enough for the 50D's 15 MP (I started to notice a certain softness when I upgraded to a 7D), and strong chromatic aberration (CA) producing color fringes at edges with much contrast, in particular wide open. You can remove CA if you shoot RAW and post process those images you took in such critical light settings. In less contrast rich settings, CA is no problem.

We have a Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.0 for our Nikon gear. It is overall not as fast but sharper than Canon's EF 17-55, and quite compact and light. It sports a very good Macro mode as a special feature, so you can have a lot of close-up fun with it (flowers, insects etc.). It would be an absolutely great lens if there weren't AF. Our copy doesn't focus very reliable despite we carefully micro adjusted its AF on our Nikon DLSRs. 

AF trouble is always a risk with 3rd party lenses. This could apply also to the Tamron 17-50mm/2.8 which you should also consider. I never used this lens, but maybe others here can help you with their experience. 

I have the Tamron 24-70/2.8 full frame lens (for my 5D3), but I wouldn't recommend it for a crop camera such as the 50D. 24mm is definitely a loss of wide angle, and this zoom with its big lenses is definitely too big and heavy for what it delivers on a crop sensor. Optically it is very good, but AF performance is - again - a problem.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 12, 2015)

17-55 as the general purpose lens. 

As a second lens for more distant objects, get the 70-200F4 IS....super good lens and plays well with a 1,4 teleconverter even on a crop camera....

Avoid super zooms like the 18-200. Eventually you will realize that the image quality is terrible and it will become an expensive paperweight.


----------



## piotrekhc (Sep 12, 2015)

Thanks guys for all the advice's!
I am going to go for CANON EF-S 10-18 mm and later on Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.
Thank you once again
Regards Pete


----------



## gregorywood (Sep 12, 2015)

Meatcurry said:


> I would go for the 15-85, very sharp and the widest EFS lens bar actual wide angel lens. Also worth picking up the 50mm STM



I can highly recommend the 15-85. I used it pretty much exclusively on the 7D when I first got it up until I bought my 6D and converted to all EF lenses. I sometimes miss not having it when I have only the 7D with me. It IS just that good. Great range, super sharp, not too large or heavy.

I just picked up the 50mm STM and so far I love it compared to both the 1.8 II and 1.4 versions of the Canon 50.

I never had the 17-55mm, mostly because I didn't like the short range and it's reputation for being a dust magnet.

Greg


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 12, 2015)

piotrekhc said:


> Thanks guys for all the advice's!
> I am going to go for CANON EF-S 10-18 mm and later on Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.
> Thank you once again
> Regards Pete


Have you looked at the Tokina 11-16? It is surprisingly good......


----------



## Arty (Sep 12, 2015)

piotrekhc said:


> Hi
> 
> Recently i bought my 1st dslr canon 50d, and now I'm looking to get a new lens.
> I had few lenses in mind but I just cant decide. For example Canon 17-40mmf/4l was my 1st choice good price but apparently it does not perform well on crop cameras, and lack of IS puts me of. So there is Sigma Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM but it is massive, and I just don't know, also lack of IS. Finally my 3rd choice Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L but is a bit pricey.
> ...


The 17-40 performs great on crop bodies. It does have a limited, but useful range and lacks IS. I like it on crop, along with the 24-105L. If you want to take low light, indoor pictures, you need a wider aperture. You can get this with a fast prime, like the 35F2IS. An alternative is the 17-55IS, but it is only F2.8. It is as big and about as heavy as the 24-105L. The newer non L 24-105IS is a little cheaper, smaller and lighter. If your photos of your cat are indoors, you will need a faster lens than some of the zooms that have been suggested.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 12, 2015)

I'd start with a 15-85mm lens. They are not horribly expensive, and cover a wide range. I'd pass on the 17-40L. Its not bad, but the 2mm wider makes a big difference.

If I wanted a faster lens, the 17-55mm EF-s is a great lens.


----------



## eli452 (Sep 12, 2015)

Well, how "all around" you wanna get? I know the 24-105 f/4L is oldish, overshadowed by many other lens , but it is better than the usual credit it gets, especially on crop body. It is much better suitable for "all around/walk about" lens.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 12, 2015)

From yesterday....

Cat - 70-200F4 at 75mm

Landscape - 17-55F2.8 at 17mm

Sunset - Tokina 11-16F2.8 at 11mm

These are my three most used lenses. Add in a macro lens and a long lens and you have almost everything covered.


----------



## John (Sep 12, 2015)

if u don't need to shoot at an aperture of 2.8, then you should definitely get the 24-105L f/4 if you can afford it. you will be glad that u did. it's a great all-around lens. no question about that. plus, there will be times when you are glad that you have the zoom range.


----------



## LovePhotography (Sep 12, 2015)

If you're looking for your *first* lens, I'd go with the Sigma 24-105 Art. I have 10 of Canons newest and best lenses all the way from 8mm to 600mm and this lens gets used 80% of the time.
If you're looking for your *only* lens, I'd go for the Sigma 18-250. Most reviews have it as the best superzoom for crop sensors... And, the price is right. I have one on my T5i, and for general stuff, it's more than enough. And, it's small, light, and if it gets dropped, no big deal... $349.
http://www.adorama.com/SG18250EOSM.html


----------



## bholliman (Sep 13, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'd start with a 15-85mm lens. They are not horribly expensive, and cover a wide range. I'd pass on the 17-40L. Its not bad, but the 2mm wider makes a big difference.
> 
> If I wanted a faster lens, the 17-55mm EF-s is a great lens.



+1 The 15-85 IS is an excellent general purpose lens for APS-C, When I owned a 550D and 7D it was almost always on my camera. The 17-55 f/2.8 IS is a better choice if you shoot in low light or want better depth of field control.


----------



## brad-man (Sep 13, 2015)

bholliman said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I'd start with a 15-85mm lens. They are not horribly expensive, and cover a wide range. I'd pass on the 17-40L. Its not bad, but the 2mm wider makes a big difference.
> ...



These two are the best "all-around" lenses for APSC cameras. I have no experience with the f2.8 lens, but it seems to be highly regarded. I do have the 15-85 and its build quality and performance rivals L lenses, it lives on my T4i travel camera. This is a very reasonable price:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/151724313012?item=151724313012&lgeo=1&vectorid=229466&rmvSB=true


----------



## old-pr-pix (Sep 13, 2015)

bholliman said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I'd start with a 15-85mm lens. They are not horribly expensive, and cover a wide range. I'd pass on the 17-40L. Its not bad, but the 2mm wider makes a big difference.
> ...



+++ on the 15-85. I use both 15-85 and a 24-105L (came w/5DII kit) on my 60D. Generally I prefer the 15-85 for walk-around. Only gripe I have w/my copy of 15-85 is zoom creep -- shooting down on anything requires holding the lens in position. For me, 24-105L isn't wide enough on crop for general use, plus its T-stop rating makes it actually closer to a f5.6 lens. 

As suggested, add a 50 STM for low light and 55-250 STM for tele. Tokina 11-16 is also excellent, but limited zoom range. Check Canon for a refurb. sale - Canon refurbs have full warranty and everyone I've ordered was in mint condition.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 13, 2015)

I used to heartily recommend the 15-85mm as a walk-around lens. Now, I'm adding the 18-135 STM as an inexpensive option.

17-55 EF-S f2.8 is a very good lens, and Canon has cut the price, but it is still expensive. It's a trade-off between speed and range. I think the 55mm maximum focal length is too short for an all around shooting lens and if you aren't shooting inside or in low light, the f2.8 isn't that much of an advantage.

15-85 EF-S is very good, substantial build and versatile. It translates into 24mm at the wide end, which is a significant difference from the EF-S 17 or 18 mm. (Which are more in the range of 28mm on full frame) At the long end, it's equivalent to 135 mm. The variable aperture makes it less than ideal for low light shooting, but I find it much more versatile than the 17-55 mm length.

As I said, I am now also recommending the 18-135 mm STM kit lens. Canon's new generation of STM lenses are quite good and very reasonably priced. The 18-135 is often sold as a kit with the 70D and 7D II, so there are a lot of "white box" versions of the lenses available at low cost. One thing I really like about this lens is that its stabilization at the wide end has been optimized for video, making it very nice for shooting hand held video if you ever want to do that. 

I would not recommend any full frame lenses unless you are planning to go full frame very soon. You'll pay a premium and not see any advantage. Buy one of these less costly EF-S lenses. If you do switch to full frame at some point, you will always be able to resell the lenses and since they are less expensive, you won't take that much of a loss. 

Check out Canon's refurbished store if you are in the U.S. and compare prices at CanonPriceWatch.com.


----------



## FTb-n (Sep 13, 2015)

RobertG. said:


> For a crop body the EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 would be my lens of choice. I use this lens for 6 years already and can still recommend it. The EF-S 15-85mm would be a worth a look, too.


+1
The EF-S 17-55 is IMHO the best short zoom for crop bodies. It's sharp and the constant f2.8 aperture is an asset for indoor use. The IQ is L-quality and I have been particularly impressed with focus speed. I've used this lens court-side during volleyball games when one must quickly aim and shoot. The AF system never let me down.


----------



## Ruined (Sep 13, 2015)

piotrekhc said:


> Hi
> 
> Recently i bought my 1st dslr canon 50d, and now I'm looking to get a new lens.
> I had few lenses in mind but I just cant decide. For example Canon 17-40mmf/4l was my 1st choice good price but apparently it does not perform well on crop cameras, and lack of IS puts me of. So there is Sigma Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM but it is massive, and I just don't know, also lack of IS. Finally my 3rd choice Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L but is a bit pricey.
> ...



Canon 35mm f/2 IS USM


----------



## roguewave (Sep 14, 2015)

I'm surprised nobody mentioned Sigma 17-50 as an alternative to Canon 17-55. I've had both and I oftentimes chose the Sigma because it is noticeably smaller and lighter. If cost and weight are not an issue, Canon is slightly better. However, Sigma is almost as good for nearly 1/2 price.

In my experience:
Sigma's corners are softer at 2.8
Sigma's AF is good both in terms of speed and accuracy, but Canon focuses faster in low light
Sigma can focus closer (i.e. better magnification)
Sigma does not have full time manual focus
IS works well on both
Sigma has tighter build, whereas Canon may start to creep
As mentioned, Sigma is smaller, lighter, and significantly cheaper

I've also used Canon 17-40 on a crop. I liked the contrast and colours it produced, but it was not long enough for all around shooting, did not have IS and was on the slow side with /f4. For crop, I would choose either the 17-55 (or -50) or 15-85 over it, depending on one's needs.

Canon 24-105 worked well on a crop for me when I did not need to go wider or brought a wider lens to complement it, but I would not choose it as my only lens.


----------



## sdsr (Sep 14, 2015)

Since I don't know what you mean by all around shooting I'll make a few broader comments. First, slow FF zooms (constant f4) seem an odd choice on aps-c to me - you're usually paying more for a ff lens, you're using only part of its glass, it doesn't perform as well as it would on a FF body and may not perform as well as some aps-c lenses on an aps-c body anyway, and, if you care about noise and like shallow focus, starting at f4 seems rather limiting. Second, how will you be viewing your photos? Zooms aren't as good as primes, usually, but if you're not using a big monitor or regularly viewing at 100% or printing big, the difference will matter less, if at all; the very good Canon 10-18 and the surprisingly good Sigma 18-250 - both have IS - may well be good enough for just about anything. (I'm evidently part of a tiny minority -of one? - in being quite underwhelmed by the 17-55 2.8, whose price seems to me way out of proportion to its image quality.) 

I tend to prefer primes, many of which have IS (I could probably go all day with just the 35mm IS, while perhaps wishing it were faster still), but I'm not you ....


----------



## StudentOfLight (Sep 14, 2015)

Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 + Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Sep 14, 2015)

RobertG. said:


> For a crop body the EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 would be my lens of choice. I use this lens for 6 years already and can still recommend it. The EF-S 15-85mm would be a worth a look, too.


I'd suggest the 17-55mm f2.8 IS to be the all-around lens for everything. Yes, the 15-85mm offers wider and longer focal lenght, which is very useful. However, I found myself carrying another fast prime for situations where lighting conditions were far from ideal. I used extensively the latter though, with excellent results.


----------



## nc0b (Sep 14, 2015)

I rarely shoot with my two crop bodies any more, maybe 10% of the time. Not because they take bad pictures, which they don't, but because my zoom lens focal lengths work better for me on full frame. You need to figure out whether you are going to buy a used FF or stick with crop long term. The 15-85mm EF-S is a fine lens out doors with good light but too slow most of the time indoors for what I shoot. The 24-105mm is a very versatile lens on FF, particularly on my 6D in low light when I really have to push the ISO. I doubt I will buy a other variable aperture lens after being spoiled with constant aperture zooms.


----------



## FTb-n (Sep 14, 2015)

Ruined said:


> piotrekhc said:
> 
> 
> > Hi
> ...


Another fine suggestion. The 35 f2 IS would be my first choice in prime lenses for crop.

While the 17-55 is my first choice for a general purpose crop body lens, I often use a 7D/3f f2 IS combination as a grab shot camera.


----------

