A&P Best Canon 18-55 kit lens replacement?

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by dano, Sep 8, 2007.

  1. dano

    dano OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    42,307
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Far enough outside Detroit
    Not the lens that owns all other lenses ever made, but just a damn good replacement piece. After having that 100-400 L glass for a week, I realized how soft the kit lens is and what a giant piece of crap it truly is, now it's really depressing to use it for anything. :rofl:

    I'm not looking to spend over $200-$300 if possible. Toss out some ideers.
     
  2. GregFarz78

    GregFarz78 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Messages:
    64,128
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    I'm pretty happy with my sigma 17-70 its not L glass but it was only around $300 :dunno: lot of people seem to like the tamron 17-50 too
     
  3. aCab

    aCab New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    18,292
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chicaaago
    Sigma 17-70.
     
  4. e.pie

    e.pie Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Messages:
    91,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    KFLY
    canon 17-85 IS isn't too bad of a lens
     
  5. Derrict

    Derrict No, I am not Amish OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,484
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Amish Country, PA
    tamron 17 50 2.8 ~ $400 new, $300 used.
     
  6. F1

    F1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Messages:
    8,390
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    MN
    I think I'm going to go with the Tamron 17-35mm to replace the kit lens. It's $290 new and I already have the Canon 50mm f/1.8. Anyone know if there's any difference in image quality between the 17-35 and 17-50?
     
  7. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    .
     
  8. spizarxxx

    spizarxxx DSLR, GSD, DJ CREW & OT's Resident On Air Personal

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    8,617
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    541/Oregon
    x2 and I just got mine today
     
  9. Derrict

    Derrict No, I am not Amish OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,484
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Amish Country, PA
    IQ should be pretty good on both, though some will give the 17 50 the slight edge. It really depends what you shoot. The extra 15mm might be important for some, not so for others. I find my 16 35 is lacking at times, wishing I had just a little more reach.
     
  10. ace3

    ace3 mouthify my wang.

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    122,602
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    Omaha NebrASSka Posts: 15
    agreed. i like my 17-70
     
  11. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    :werd: I was torn between the 17-40, 16-35 and the tam 17-50 but once I used them all I choose the 17-50 simply for the extra stop over the 17-40 and the extra 15mm over the 16-35. It just seemed to have an edge over both respectively and IQ was on par with both and build quality was good enough for me and much better than reported in arguments. Lately I keep finding more and more uses for this lens and thus far it has only been off once in favor of my 70-200. Being able to do some wide angle shots and switch instantly to doing portraits at 50mm f2.8 is awesome.
     

Share This Page