| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/16/2010 12:07:39 PM · #1 |
I may be able to buy one lens in the near future. I am considering the following:
Canon EF-S 15-85 Goes both a moderate amount wider and longer than my 18-55 kit lens, plus would be a good bump up in image quality. This would replace my kit lens and give me a moderately wider view for the strong perspective shots that I like. Combined with the improved sharpness and having 15Mp on my 50D, the amount of zoom would probably be sufficient for most uses. (I currently have a 28-300 Tamron, but the sharpness is not always acceptable at the long end)
Canon 10-22 A very popular wide lens that probably needs no description. Would get me some incredible wide views, but would supplement my 18-55 and 28-300.
The Tamron 10-24 has also gotten some positive reviews and is a fair amount less $$ than the Canon. Not as many owners here on DPC, and none with the Canon mount version.
Message edited by author 2010-03-16 12:07:49. |
|
|
|
03/16/2010 12:55:49 PM · #2 |
| I almost bought the Tokina 12-24 instead of the Canon 10-22.... Certainly worth a look if you need to save a few hundred.... but you lose those wide 2mm which is HUGE (why I went for the Canon... if ya gonna go wide then go W I D E :-) ).... |
|
|
|
03/16/2010 01:02:32 PM · #3 |
the 10-22 canon is way fun!! I'd definitely skip the 15-85. I rarely use that range, I tend to use 10-22 and 100-400 and avoid the midrange whenever possible (although, maybe it's because I don't have a great lens).  Melethia got me interested in the 10-22 and I absolutely adore it.
|
|
|
|
03/16/2010 01:17:03 PM · #4 |
I was given a Sigma 12-24 EX DG recently, I must say - that is a very good lens for the wide angle stuff on my 50D, and it's a big enough lens to "balance" the body :)
Here's a shot with it :) (My PB, and first entry with the lens)
I must admit though that the 10-22mm Canon lens is still tempting :)
Message edited by author 2010-03-16 13:19:03. |
|
|
|
03/16/2010 01:19:46 PM · #5 |
I just bought the 10-22 last week. I thought I'd use it as a supplement to my 18-200 and expected to use it for limited shots. But in the short time I've had it I've realized that I might end up using the 18-200 as the supplement. The thing is, I'm not yet used to getting so close to my subject but when I do, the results are really fun.
Originally posted by vawendy:
I tend to use 10-22 and 100-400 and avoid the midrange whenever possible |
I think this is my goal. By next year at this time (ok, maybe a few years) I will own the 100-400. |
|
|
|
03/17/2010 11:58:11 AM · #6 |
i went for the 10-22 and i LOVE it but im sure you dont need to hear that seeing as most people ive talked to about the 10-22 LOVE it. i would be inclined to go for the 15-85 if it were faster but i cant find a reason to buy a lens in that focal range for that price that isnt fast and constant aperture. if i were you and really wanted a standard walkabout zoom i would go straight for the 17-55 or the 24-70 (or 28-70). but thats just me. i realize that the 15-85 does offer a quite ideal focal range but the speed doesnt cut it for me.
get the 10-22 :) |
|
|
|
03/17/2010 12:06:37 PM · #7 |
6 of my top 10 entries were shot with then 10-22. If you intend to stay in EF-S land, the 10-22 is neccessary.
|
|
|
|
03/17/2010 12:14:06 PM · #8 |
| Sounds like the 10-22 is the way to go. I can always add a better walkabout lens later, but this will give me some capability I don't have now. Thanks for all the advice. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/25/2025 03:00:34 PM EST.
