Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

CANON DSLR Lens upgrade advice needed

6K views 39 replies 13 participants last post by  james99 
If you don't want to switch lenses then why don't you consider selling your DSLR and getting a super zoom P&S like the S3? I'm not being critical - just wondering.

When it comes to covering a wide focal range you can't have your cake and eat it too.

These super zooms trade image quality for convenience. The 18-55 is not a bad lens. The 55-250IS is not a bad lens. But both of them are better than any single lens that covers the whole range.

The Tamron lens is rated better than the Canon & Sigma equivalents (but not by much - it's more a case of the lesser of evils).

Another option is looking for a good deal on someone selling one of the dual lens kit lenses? I notice you are in Ottawa and a quick look on Kijiji I found someone selling a 55-250IS New In Box and others selling gently used ones for less than half the price of the Tamron lens.

However, be warned. I first replaced my 18-55 with a 24-85 as I wanted more reach (The wide end is easier). It's a slippery slope though. I augmented the 24-85 with a 70-200 f/4L. That saitieted my appetite for a while but I began to love the sharpness & contrast of the 70-200 and stopped using the 24-85 after while. It wasn't long before I replaced the 24-85 with a 24-105 f/4L IS. Then I wanted to go wide again and bought a 17-40 f/4L. The Itch just wouldn't stop though and I upgraded the 70-200 f/4L to a 70-200 f/2.8L IS. Yes, my name is Bruce and I'm a "L" glass addict. I can stop any time. Honestly ...
 
Someone above mentioned the Canon 28-105 / 3.5-4.5; how/why is it that this lens is so much less expensive than Canon's 24-105 4L?

I know the "L" is IS, so surely that accounts for part of it, but what is it about the "L" lenses that makes them 4 or 5 times the price of comparable (in looking strictly at numbers) sized lenses? Is it the quality of the actual glass inside the lens?

Just looking to learn more about this little world...
Yes, "L" or Luxury lenses have much better glass. They tend to have more esoteric lens elements, better coatings and are designed to minimize distortions. They also tend to be built more ruggedly with metal mounts, metal bodies, weather sealing and features like Full Time Manual focusing.

It's like the 80/20 rule where 20% of the work will get 80% of the job done but the remaining 80% of the work only results in 20% further completion. This rule applies to pricing as well. The design costs for a L lens is much higher and they sell less of them so they are very expensive.

As David mentioned lenses like the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 are hidden "L" lenses. This lens is a stellar performer and well built but it also comes with a "L" class price.
 
...My main beef with the stock 18-55mm that came with the camera is that the AF can be flaky sometimes. ...
AF can be flaky irrespective of the lens. That's the nature of Auto anything - It's like the ADD dog in UP - Squirrel (I think I'll focus on that branch in front (behind) the subject). Try using focusing with the Centre AF point and recomposing the picture.

Set the Camera to use just the Centre AF point. Aim the camera at what you want focused, press the shutter button halfway & hold it there, reframe for the image you want & press down all the way.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top