stogie1020

Makes sense.

Shalooby

You can use mine anytime .......

wndrlst

waTSX

It seems to me you've already answered your own question. Since you shoot a lot at the longer end of the 17-85, the 24-105 seems the better alternative for you (versus the 17-55). That said, I also came from the 17-85 to the 17-55 and was also somewhat concerned with the loss of range from 55-85. It hasn't been an issue. The 17-55 is a great lens optically and I love the constant 2.8. It's so much better than the 17-85 that it's a no-brainer, and I'd wager that it easily competes with the 24-105 optically also. It spends mucho time on my 40D.

As for the loss of reach, I've adapted to it and don't notice it any more. If I need more zoom, I use my feet. I also thought the 24-105 would be a nice lens, but I truly believe the 24mm is an awkward wide end on a crop body. I think the 17-55 is the ultimate "walk-around" lens for Canon crop bodies. Just food for thought.

And a 17-105 f/2.8 would be an effin' brick.

srika

fear is the ultimate motivator

wndrlst

See, that's my exact dilemma. I do worry a little about the loss of the wide end, especially since I'm reading that the barrel distortion at 24 is pretty severe.

I need to keep reminding myself, though, that my shooting is pretty different from yours & Moe's. You are both more likely to be wandering an urban environment, while I'm more likely to be trying to catch a bird or deer that I can't walk closer to without scaring off, or trying to catch something on another hill that I can't move toward easily. So, yes, it's still sounding like the 24-105 is the better compromise for me. I still have some trepidation about spending that kind of cash on a compromise, though. Grr.

I guess I was hoping someone here had it for use on a cropped sensor. I was also looking for feedback about the lens in general. Sounds like aside from the distortion at the wide end, it's a great lens. It's so hard to know how experienced &/or picky the people reviewing it at B&H are though. I like to hear about things from people whose photos I've seen & whose discussions I've read.

And yes, it would!! But it would be a brick worth for!

wndrlst

You're pretty effin skeery.

moeronn

^^ Check out the lens forum on POTN. They should have an "archive" thread of shots using the 24-105 to give you an idea of the IQ is.

As for the distortion, wouldn't it be less obvious on a crop body?

F-it - here are a few links that might help:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=484061

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...ghlight=24-105

Sarlacc

I'm getting an urge here

wndrlst

Ha, thanks Moe.

Osamu

i'm not sure what kinda budget you are on, but for me it always seemed like much of the 24-105 range could be covered by the 28-135. I guess you are already giving up a lot on the wide end that another 4mm would be hard to deal with and it's probably not a big enough upgrade from the 17-85, but with everyone parting out their 40D kits, it seems like you can get really good deals on the 28-135. It won't have L build I guess but I haven't really heard anything too bad about the 28-135.

yea, kinda sucks they don't have anything better in the 17-85 range w/ IS. Sometimes I feel like just buying a sigma 18-200 OS and not dealing w/ a bunch of lenses, but that kinda defeats the purpose of an SLR. I think there are rumors of a canon 18-200 IS floating around, but I haven't been keeping trackk.

Mizouse

i would love to have a EF-S 18-200mm f/4.0 IS USM it would be perfect for vacations

Osamu

yea, I am still thinking about it. Maybe an 18-200 and swap my tokie 12-24 for a 11-16 when they are more readily available............then I have an excuse to go all prime from there .

Shalooby

I'm going to have to stop reading about all these different lenses, I'm getting jealous. Maybe one day I'll be able to upgrade from the basic ones I have, but it's not a possibility right now. Feel like a kid looking through the window at FAO Schwartz.

Evader

So i'm pretty sure i'm going with the D60 as my First dSLR camera...I don't see myself upgrading anytime soon since I have soo damn much to learn about photograpgy. It will be a fun learning experience though!

I'm coming from a Kodak DX7590 which had a 12x optical zoom. I loved this camera and the picture quality was incredible (for a P&S, obviously doesn't come close to what you can do with a dSLR)

I need some suggestions on what lens to buy for the D60 I'm obviously looking for one that will have a comparable zoom and I know this won't be cheap. I'm turning to the experts here for some friendly advice.

Thanks!

Sarlacc

Just buy the kit...D60 that comes with the lens...or two lenses.

Those will be good enough for you to start with.

Evader

One of the first places my camera will go to is a baseball game...I'll be a few rows from the field, you think these lenses will suffice? Is the zoom rating the same on SLR cameras that that of a P&S? I've tried searching for Nikon 10-12x zoom lenses and cant' seem to find too much.

I know it's not a zoom lens but I ran across a fisheye in one of my photography books....looks like one could have a lot of fun with that.

I don't even have camera in my hands yet and I'm already catching the photo bug!

jupitersolo

You're screwed, forget any other "hobbies" or interests you had once photo bug bites you.

Sarlacc

Talk me out of getting the 14-24 zoom for my Nikon. I was playing with it at Samys yesterday. took some snaps on the D3 to bring home and look at.

It would become my primary walk around lens.

I cant afford...but I'd use going to India as the excuse to get it...

I know I shouldnt...

convince me.

EuRTSX

Get it get it get it!

jupitersolo

If you can't afford it don't get it, I don't buy something unless I know I can pay for it when the CC bill comes. Because of interest you can pay hundreds of $$ more for the lens.

Sarlacc

I have 0% on my card right now, and I know it will get paid off in a month or two after this doc pays me...

The question is how bad do I want to do it after I just bought the new body.

Osamu

would you sell your 24mm as well?

I spent probably ~$1000 on camera junk for a trip I have coming up to Europe. But I didn't just buy a new body either. I just figure for a 'once in a lifetime' kinda trip, $1000 isn't too much.

I'm not sure if I'd feel comfortable buying stuff on ebay, but I know a lot of people using the microsoft live thing to get 20-25% or $250 back. If that actually goes through. I have like $200 I'm 'supposed' to get back, but even I'm kinda skeptical. And I didn't buy any lenses with it, cause I'm not sure about the whole warranty, grey market stuff, but my friend did use it for a canon 10-22.

Sarlacc

I would want to sell my 24mm yeah, but I doubt its worth very much. Sad that most glass just doesnt hold its value like it used.

So, if I dont sell it I offered to give my dad my D100...which isnt worth anything either, and I would just give him that lens and the 35-70 I never use.

jupitersolo

Well you answered your own question.

Sarlacc

I always answer my own questions...but I still usually need someone else to smack me down to feel better about it

moeronn

What are the chances that the India part of your trip might get canceled like the Indonesia (IIRC) part did?

Spending money you have > spending money you don't have

This is one of those "Do as I say, not as I do" situations, since I spend money I don't yet have, too.

Sarlacc

hehe funny you mention that....after weeks of talking they are NOW trying to negotiate the pay...which I thought we had already discussed...it isnt much of a difference, but I still feel there is a certain fairness....we'll see how my counter offer goes.

pebe

I don't feel like looking back right now, but can someone enlighten me on lens brands.

Tokina
Sigma
Tamron

What's the deal with these. Some are significantly cheaper than Nikon/Canon lenses and also, some are alot more expensive. How do these 3 brands rate, maybe you can scale them for me. Thanks

moeronn

I don't have any first hand experience with any of them, but it just like any other brand, they have some good one's and some not so good ones. So you can't really say one brand is better than the rest. They each have some decent lenses, but not all are great.

The three brands above will generally be cheaper than the Nikon/Canon "equivalent".

jupitersolo

All three sell well I would list them as

Sigma
Tamron
Tokina

You have to find what lens you want and then go look at the reviews for it.

Osamu

each brand has good and bad lenses, Just like canon and nikon have good and bad lenses. Like I would buy a tamron 17-50 over most of it's competition, but not the 11-18. I know they also have the consumer vs. pro line, like the sigma EX vs. regular. I wouldn't rank one higher than the other, unless you are comparing specific models.

if I HAD to rank them though, maybe
Sigma - has a lot of good lenses, especially their EX line. Main complaint I've heard with sigma is their questionable quality control. It seems like they have a lot of lenses that need to be sent back for calibration. But when they do work, they are very good.
Tokina - doesn't make THAT many lenses, mostly known for 2 (the 12-24, and the 11-16). Both of which are extremely good lenses, and have build quality as good or better than most canon/nikon lenses. But they are kinda behind in technology (in that they don't have an IS/VR/OS/VC system), and don't really offer a lot of choices. But considering most of THK's products including filters/tubes/etc. are all made pretty well, I would almost put them up at #1.
Tamron - In general most complaints I've heard have been about build quality feeling a little cheap, and some autofocus issues in low light, and being loud. the 17-50 gets rave reviews in image quality tests though.

As I am on a pretty tight budget and have always believed in getting the most bang for the buck, I could easily see myself running an all 3rd party set up. Probably something along the lines of, tokina 11-16, tamron 17-50, sigma 30mm, and sigma 70-200 f/2.8. Maybe add to that the sigma 150mm macro, or tokina 100mm macro, and then sell my car, and all my material possessions for the sigma 200-500 f2.8 .

pebe

Cool, thanks for all the info.

I'm looking at 70-200 right now. Used prices are pretty decent for Nikon lenses and I see a lot of Sigma as well. But basically, if both could be had for the same or little price difference, may as well go with the Nikon. I just wasn't sure about the Tamron/Tokina brands.

srika

anyone have this? thoughts?

http://cgi.ebay.com/650-1300mm-Telep...QQcmdZViewItem

Sarlacc

You uh...trying to take pictures of martians on the moon?

srika

i could be.......

hey, you got your uh... "status" changed... congrats!

srika

serious though I am wondering about this..

http://cgi.ebay.com/Sigma-28-300mm-D...QQcmdZViewItem

I would love to get Canon's version but that's just a wee bit out of my price range atm..

srika

50mm 0.95!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/blentle...44304/sizes/o/

stogie1020

^That's sexy!

jupitersolo

That was the FD mount, Canon once made that lens for EF but stopped when the stopped putting lead in their glass. Older lens with lead FTW.