What is your walk around lens?
- Thread starter windwaver
- Start date
- Status
groovecouch
New Member
17-85
anyone having regrets over the distortion on this thing?
anyone having regrets over the distortion on this thing?
NE clicks clicks
New Member
For me, 24-105 f/4 L serves me well . But at times, when I decide to shoot only with prime, its the 50 f/1.4 and 28 f/1.8 combo.
ditikolon
Member
Last edited:
It really depends on the camera you use and your preferred style of shooting. :dunno:
On the 40D, I used the Tamron 17-50mm as my primary lens for walkabout and the 35mm f/1.4 as the primary night shooting lens.
On the 5DmkII now, it has become the 24-70mm L instead but I shoot an equal if not larger number of frames using the Sigma 12-24mm instead. Even in sports action sequences! :sweat:
And it also depends on the subject you're intending to shoot. Some people prefer wider perspective and use even ultra-wides on FF for portraits. Most would used the more general 24-135mm on FF instead. Some would use the 70-200mm range. There really isn't a true 'right' answer, neither is there a 'wrong' one. :dunno:
Or for a real walkaround, on a FF, try the Tamron 28-200mm ? covers almost everything ! :devil:
On the 40D, I used the Tamron 17-50mm as my primary lens for walkabout and the 35mm f/1.4 as the primary night shooting lens.
On the 5DmkII now, it has become the 24-70mm L instead but I shoot an equal if not larger number of frames using the Sigma 12-24mm instead. Even in sports action sequences! :sweat:
And it also depends on the subject you're intending to shoot. Some people prefer wider perspective and use even ultra-wides on FF for portraits. Most would used the more general 24-135mm on FF instead. Some would use the 70-200mm range. There really isn't a true 'right' answer, neither is there a 'wrong' one. :dunno:
Or for a real walkaround, on a FF, try the Tamron 28-200mm ? covers almost everything ! :devil:
jasonteoch
Member
i got both the 17-55 and 24-105....and usually pair with 10-22
xhui
New Member
hi guys,
i have been reading, browsing a bit to decide for my "walkabout" lens, on a crop 1.6x body. seriously, would the 24-105 be really tight on the 24mm side? though i've got the 10-22 lens, if you are covering events and street shots, wouldn't the "speed" be important in capturing the moments and thus lesser time for lens swap? maybe for group shots (while ppl are trying to arrange themselves etc, you could change into ur UWA, but pretty hard if you're on the go or tougher in crowded areas?) i do love my wides, but was hoping to have a sharper, "normal range" lens to complement it, (the 24-105 does gives a bit on the tele reach, so its helpful for candids too) can understand the 24-105 for a FF, but for crop and it to be a regular lens needs some thinking for now?
TS, am sorry, not trying to hijack your thread, been thinking of my walkabout lens for a while and thought i'll post here for relevancy too.
i have been reading, browsing a bit to decide for my "walkabout" lens, on a crop 1.6x body. seriously, would the 24-105 be really tight on the 24mm side? though i've got the 10-22 lens, if you are covering events and street shots, wouldn't the "speed" be important in capturing the moments and thus lesser time for lens swap? maybe for group shots (while ppl are trying to arrange themselves etc, you could change into ur UWA, but pretty hard if you're on the go or tougher in crowded areas?) i do love my wides, but was hoping to have a sharper, "normal range" lens to complement it, (the 24-105 does gives a bit on the tele reach, so its helpful for candids too) can understand the 24-105 for a FF, but for crop and it to be a regular lens needs some thinking for now?
TS, am sorry, not trying to hijack your thread, been thinking of my walkabout lens for a while and thought i'll post here for relevancy too.
I'd think you would fare better with the EF-S 17-55. It offers a more versatile range on 1.6x crop.
Hi xhui, like some have mentioned previously, I feel it really depends on your own preference. I use the 24-105 on a crop and it's not often that I miss the extra 7-8mm on the wide end. Perhaps only in a situation whereby, you don't have room at all to move back from the subject, which is quite rare for me. The extra 50mm on the long end more than makes up for it. If you find yourself using the 55mm to 105mm range quite often, then you'd find yourself changing to another lens to get longer reach anyway. So if you're not keen on changing lens often, you'd have to figure out which range you utilize more?
xhui
New Member
caleb : initially had wanted to get the tamron 17-50 for the f2.8 but kindof rationalised that since i've goton my flash and my 10-22 first, i'll probably pass on the 17-50/55 range (or maybe later when i've more $). but hey thanks!
atomboy: thanks for the personal reply. having you mention not missing the wider side and even my worry on being tight on the 24mm side kindof relieves me a bit. am going do more indoor recital hall/concert type of coverage more (of course suitability for street and walkabouts would also!), thus thought wanna explore with a better lens with my flash and the advantage of a longer tele reach.
kindof just ran thru' my photos, realised i'm almost always on the wider 18mm or the further 50+mm, guess the 10-22 and 24-105 should do just fine.
thanks again guys!
ditikolon
Member
i think 24-105 makes more sense since you've already said you don't miss the wide end, plus you already have a 10-22 UWA. 17-55 is a stellar lens for the crop body though, suggest you try both 17-55 and 24-105 out before you buy, especially if you enjoy your 18-55's zoom range.
xhui
New Member
hi ditilolon, thanks for the reply and feedbacks! i'm going rent the lens to try as i'll be covering an event the coming weekend, would be a great opportunity to evaluate my comfortable range further!
(will prob only try the 24-105 though)..- Status
Similar threads
