Reef Central Online Community

Home Forum Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences View New Posts View Today's Posts

Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Search Reefkeeping ...an online magazine for marine aquarists Support our sponsors and mention Reef Central

Go Back   Reef Central Online Community Archives > Special Interest Group (SIG) Forums > Photography

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12/24/2007, 11:25 PM
d4a2n0k d4a2n0k is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 2,267
Best all around lens for XTi

Hi All,

Im in the market for a new all around lens for my Rebel XTi. Right now I have the 18-55 kit lens and the 100mm Macro. I'm looking for a replacement for the kit lens which really isnt cutting it. Something that will do better in low light.

I am looking at the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM and the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM. Being both of these lenses are not cheap, I want to make sure I make the right decision. I like the IS on the 17-55 and heard the glass is excellent even though its not an "L" lens. Does IS make that much of a difference? Am I better off skipping the IS and getting the better glass on the 24-70? To throw things off here, I was also looking at the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM but figured the other two lenses would be better in lower light situations although this lens would give me a wider range. Im really confused.

I basically want a great lens for around the house and for taking pics of my new baby and my tank. Something that will stay on the camera most of the time.

Any suggestions or first hand experience with any of the above lenses would be great.

Thanks
  #2  
Old 12/25/2007, 02:25 AM
JeffReef JeffReef is offline
Got Zoa Pox?
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Natomas Park Sacramento, CA
Posts: 568
I'd recommend a Sigma 18-50mm EX DG 2.8 plus a Sigma 50-150mm EX HSM 2.8. Both are sharp and fast lenses.

But if you only need one lens, just get the Sigma 18-200mm EX OS.
__________________
The sea, the great unifier, is man's only hope. Now, as never before, the old phrase has a literal meaning: we are all in the same boat.

-Jacques Yves Cousteau
  #3  
Old 12/25/2007, 11:20 AM
Blazer88 Blazer88 is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 1,973
I have the 17-55 F/2.8 IS and absolutely love it. I previously had the 24-105 F/4L and was never impressed with the quality as the pictures weren't that sharp if I shot wide open. I really don't think you are skimping on the quality of glass from the 24-70 if you go with the 17-55, it's one really impressive lens. And the IS on the lens makes a really large difference. I shoot a lot of low-light stuff and the lens has never failed me yet. Another thing to consider is the size of the 24-70 versus the 17-55, the 24-70 is a brick!
  #4  
Old 12/25/2007, 12:39 PM
JeffReef JeffReef is offline
Got Zoa Pox?
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Natomas Park Sacramento, CA
Posts: 568
Rick is right about the 24-70 being heavy. I sold mine to get the 16-35 but ended up getting a different combo- Sigma 10-20 and Sigma 18-50. I shoot a lot of wide angles and the 24-70 is just too narrow for my 20D. I would have kept the 24-70 if I had a full frame.

The 24-70 copy was sharp but I don't miss it.
__________________
The sea, the great unifier, is man's only hope. Now, as never before, the old phrase has a literal meaning: we are all in the same boat.

-Jacques Yves Cousteau
  #5  
Old 12/25/2007, 01:43 PM
d4a2n0k d4a2n0k is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 2,267
Thanks for the responses. I was leaning towards the 24-70 but if the thing weighs a ton, the 17-55 might be a better choice. I know I dont want to be carrying around a heavy lens if its not a telephoto. I think I might go with the 17-55 now....

That 10-20 Sigma is also on my wishlist but that is for a later date after I get this all around lens sorted out.

I guess I'll swing by B&H and take a look at both of them.

Thanks again!
  #6  
Old 12/25/2007, 02:43 PM
Blazer88 Blazer88 is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 1,973
Another thing that I didn't mention was that I didn't like the focal length of the 24-105/70 lenses. I find the 17-55 much more useful on a crop body since the 24mm seem to be too wide. About the Sigma 10-20, don't hesitate on that one either. It's another lens that is just plain fun to use
  #7  
Old 12/25/2007, 03:12 PM
d4a2n0k d4a2n0k is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 2,267
Thanks, that makes sense. I think Im gonna go with the 17-55 now. Actually it was your shots with the 10-20 Sigma that convinced me to go with that in the future as well.

I need a 2nd job......or pick less expensive hobbies.
  #8  
Old 12/25/2007, 03:31 PM
ChrisF ChrisF is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Boulder, Co
Posts: 6
I have the Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR and love it.
  #9  
Old 12/25/2007, 06:27 PM
MCary MCary is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Montana
Posts: 2,771
I've heard nothing but good things about the 17-55. Nice choice. I just bought the 50mm 1.4 myself. Haven't had a chance to use it yet, but a 50mm 1.8 is a nice buy also at only $70.

Mike
  #10  
Old 12/25/2007, 07:03 PM
beerguy beerguy is offline
RC Staff & Thread Pirate
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The left coast
Posts: 12,970
I love the 24-70 but it is a big heavy beast.
__________________
Doug - v2.0.4

Nuclear winter solves global warming.
  #11  
Old 12/25/2007, 10:08 PM
d4a2n0k d4a2n0k is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 2,267
I figured I couldnt go wrong with either but with the plastic body of the XTi, it wouldnt exactly be balanced or comfortable around my neck with a few lbs. hanging off the front. I know with my macro lens, it makes the camera VERY front heavy but thats fine because its almost always used on a tripod. With the type of lens Im looking for now, I think the 17-55 is my best bet. Plus its a few bucks cheaper than the 24-70 so my wallet will thank me.

Thanks for the help guys. I will post some pics in a few days when I pickup the 17-55.

Happy Holidays!
  #12  
Old 12/25/2007, 11:06 PM
beerguy beerguy is offline
RC Staff & Thread Pirate
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The left coast
Posts: 12,970
Definitely.

With the XTi on that body you'd really want the battery grip to balance it out with the 24-70 attached.
__________________
Doug - v2.0.4

Nuclear winter solves global warming.
  #13  
Old 01/01/2008, 11:30 PM
d4a2n0k d4a2n0k is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 2,267
I got the 17-55 a few days ago but finally had some time for a few shots today. The first three are with the 17-55 and the last few are with the 100mm Macro. I notice a little barrel distortion on the full tank shot but that was shot at 17mm so its kind of expected. Im new to DSLR so take it easy on me but Im very happy with how sharp this lens is. It blows away the kit lens!

17-55mm






100mm Macro









Comments/critiques are welcome. I try to read other DSLR forums but none ever touch on aquarium photography so these were shot with setting Ive read here on RC.
  #14  
Old 01/02/2008, 02:40 AM
myusername myusername is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: pomona CA
Posts: 470
Hi its Charles

I have the 30D, with the 100mm Macro. I love that lens. Best of luck.[IMG][/IMG]

Last edited by myusername; 01/02/2008 at 02:46 AM.
  #15  
Old 01/02/2008, 12:58 PM
thin crust thin crust is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: SoCal, CA
Posts: 129
i just purchased the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM for my XTi and am loving it. it's WAY better than the kit lense that my cameral came with. now i need to save up for a 100mm macro.
__________________
Life moves pretty fast. You don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it. - F. Bueller
  #16  
Old 01/02/2008, 05:59 PM
d4a2n0k d4a2n0k is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 2,267
Nice Pipefish myusername.

The 100mm Macro is a must have for us reefers. The expense never ends!
  #17  
Old 01/02/2008, 09:49 PM
myusername myusername is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: pomona CA
Posts: 470
d4a2n0k:
thank you.
I do love my 100mm Macro. it dos grate with portraits to.
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Use of this web site is subject to the terms and conditions described in the user agreement.
Reef Central™ Reef Central, LLC. Copyright ©1999-2009