Suggestions for a walkaround/documentary zoom lens to throw on a 2ti

B

blimov702

Member
What do you guys use?

Or what do you guys use on your 7d's rather, since they both have APS-C sensors and the 2ti isn't out yet.

I was considering just getting the kit lens, though the range seems a little short.

I believe I read an earlier discussion on here praising the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5-6 IS

Any other ideas?


 
I would vote for the 18-135 as well. Theres also a 15-85IS and 18-200IS. Just take your pick based on budget and need for tele or wide. 200mm might be useful for candid work.
 
hmm I'm liking the possibilities of the 18-200 (especially since I'm going to be in Hollywood for a month and then Taiwan for several weeks, and would like to have plenty of photos and some video of the experiences).

Do you guys think I could get away with this lens for a while and buy some primes as the cash becomes available?

My plan is to shoot some shorts mainly on an HMC150 and spice up that footage with some shots on my future 2ti.

Any feedback would be appreciated.
 
IMO the zooms mentioned should be fine until you can get more lenses. Unless you're a low light or DOF fiend of course.
 
blimov702 said:
What do you guys use?

Or what do you guys use on your 7d's rather, since they both have APS-C sensors and the 2ti isn't out yet.

I was considering just getting the kit lens, though the range seems a little short.

I believe I read an earlier discussion on here praising the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5-6 IS

Any other ideas?
Click to expand...

The 18-135 has the worst wide end distortion of any lens tested. (Except the 18-200 which may be similar) It's also very slow at f5.6. At first it looks great but you will have trouble with your images in the end

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/462-canon_18135_3556is

In motion pictures going from f3.5 to f5.6 will also have problems. Better invest in a better Canon lens even if you have to buy used.

The only decent choice for the money is the 17-40mm L. I know it's short, but will be sharp in the range with no change in exposure. You can't have it all in one lens. The super zooms go beyond their ability to produce images without a cost. All the lenses will produce beautiful looking pictures. You just have to decide what you want to give up in the process.
 
Last edited:
In all honesty with the amount of aliasing vDSLRs suffer from, I was planning on mainly using the 2ti for telephoto/shallow DoF. The HMC150 will probably always be used for wide/deep DoF shots and the bulk of shooting in general. Plus, I think i'll be looking into the tokina 11-16 for the wide end eventually. People seem to be raving about it.
 
If by walk around lens you mean without a tripod then you must have some kind of stabalisation. IS, VR whatever. If you can afford it and it will cost more than the camera then Canon 17-55mm 2.8 IS, cheaper is the 15-85mm IS. Cheaper options could be Sigma lenses with VR. And if you want crap and cheap then get a Canon 18-55mm $100 lens with the camera.
 
You don't need super sharp glass for video with all its glorious artifacts. Again, if you want to shoot in low light or you crave crazy shallow DOF then you'll want to get a fast lens. Otherwise, I don't see whats so bad about the 18-135 or 18-200 if the guy is on a budget. I would personally rather have a super zoom than a 17-40L. The 17-40 needs more lenses to round it out, its just too limiting by itself.
 
by walk around I meant a lens for just taking pictures and video clips of scenery. For narrative, I'm planning on getting 3 or 4 used manual focus primes.
 
nonprofessional travel photography/videography, basically. I'm just wondering if the $100 dollar kit lens would be sufficient or if it would be worth it to get the 18-135 or 18-200.
 
Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but consider the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

It has a constant aperture so you can zoom while wide open without sudden exposure changes and is only $450. There is a image stabilized version for $650. Pluses are image sharpness and fast autofocus... minuses are the short focus ring throw and loud autofocus.
 
The kit lens isn't really a $100 lens anyway. If you bought that seperate it's around $500 last time I checked. I use it for a lot of things. But the change aperture does suck.
 
Richard J. Johnson said:
The kit lens isn't really a $100 lens anyway. If you bought that seperate it's around $500 last time I checked. I use it for a lot of things. But the change aperture does suck.
Click to expand...

The t2i kit lens is the 18-55 3.5-5.6 and it does craigslist for around $90 It is a decent lens, but not good for video with the focus on the lip and iris ramping.
 
shaocaholica said:
The 17-40 needs more lenses to round it out, its just too limiting by itself.
Click to expand...


I agree the 17-40mm is limited, but in the end you will need more than a few lenses so better plan ahead. The 17-40mm is an L class lens at a lower than L class lens price, about half. I plan to add a 5D FF as soon as they release a new model with the upgrades complete from the factory. FF L lenses are a better value because they work on all formats. In the end you will want lenses from 10mm to 2000mm so to start building a high quality collection from the first lens is a smart investment. Every quality lens I ever bought I still have and use.
Try to look at the lens choices from the bad points and you will avoid buyers remorse in the future.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top