Some short Canon glass

[froot]

Okay, so I've decided to get myself a short Canon lens for close-up photos. Till now I've been stuck with the stock lens that I got with the 450D (the plastic 18-55mm) but I'm ashamed to put that on the 7D

I just need something in the short focal range as the shortest I have atm is the 70-200 F4 L and it's not nearly short enough.

I've been spending some time looking at lenses and have come up with these two.
EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
Both lenses cost R7800.

I like the fact that the 17-40 is weather-sealed and from reviews it definitely looks like an extremely solid lens. Only thing obviously is it lacks the 40-70mm range. It does however seem to perform very well in low-light conditions (still not like a f2.8 but I don't have R12000 )
The 15-85 is also a pretty decent lens. Only problem is it won't fit on a full-frame camera (not a problem with the 7D obviously). It unfortunately doesn't perform too well in low-light conditions with a moving subject.

I'll probably end up going for the 15-85mm but would appreciate some suggestions.
Any help?

 

[bwana]

Do you have a 50mm 1.8 or 1.4 in your collection? If you do then the 24-70 f2.8 is considered a stalwart lens by many.

Unless by close up you mean a macro lens?

 

[froot]

Sorry, with closeup I was referring to non-long focal length shotsm. Landscape and "family portraits" and the likes. Sorry for the confusion

 

[bwana]

Ok, so you're looking for a wide angle lens then. I'm probably the wrong person to advise on this matter since I have a 16-35 which I rarely use.

 

[undesign]

The 15-85 is a fantastic everyday lens, with great IQ to compliment the 7D and an unbeatable focal range in the crop segment. The probability of going full frame is for you to decide, but I wouldn't wait, unless the change was imminent. And quality lenses supposedly hold their value fairly well.

I don't have any experience with the 17-40, but the range feels a bit limiting, F4 is not that much faster than the 15-85 and it's very short for a walk-around solution, which the 15-85 can double up for.

 

[froot]

The 15-85 is a fantastic everyday lens, with great IQ to compliment the 7D and an unbeatable focal range in the crop segment. The probability of going full frame is for you to decide, but I wouldn't wait, unless the change was imminent. And quality lenses supposedly hold their value fairly well.

I don't have any experience with the 17-40, but the range feels a bit limiting, F4 is not that much faster than the 15-85 and it's very short for a walk-around solution, which the 15-85 can double up for.

Ok cool thanks.
Yeah I'm not planning on upgrading to a full-frame anytime soon, but yeah, the option to do so and "transfer" all my lenses would be awesome. But the 7D is new so that wouldn't happen any time soon.
Yes unfortunately 40mm is somewhat short.

 

[bwana]

There's a trinity of glass that most pro's carry and it goes something like 16-35mm, 24-70, 70-200 - preferably all in 2.8

You've got the 70-200 so a 24-70 would make a certain amount of sense - fortunately Sigma makes a great one (the HSM model) for much less than the canon equivalent.

 

[froot]

Yeah I did look at the Sigma options.
One thing I am rather seriously aiming for though was as low as I can go - the 18mm is a nice start for the bottom range.
I looked at the 17-70mm Sigma but I got put off by some of the issues mentioned with the lens (don't make me remember what it was though)
But will take a looksie at the 24-70 again. Probably need to make a compromise somewhere.

Edit: the Sigma 24-70 (Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 IF EX DG HSM Lens ) is R9600 at Orms

 

[froot]

Ah yes, the Sigma 17-70 has HSM but only on the Nikon mount.... not the Canon :/
Took another look at the Canon EFS 17-85 IS USM F4-5.6 lens and it looks more than fair at under R5000. Sure, it's less awesome than the 15-85 F3.5-F5.6, but it's also a whole R2800 cheaper.
Will see though.

 

[BigAl-sa]

Ah yes, the Sigma 17-70 has HSM but only on the Nikon mount.... not the Canon :/
Took another look at the Canon EFS 17-85 IS USM F4-5.6 lens and it looks more than fair at under R5000. Sure, it's less awesome than the 15-85 F3.5-F5.6, but it's also a whole R2800 cheaper.
Will see though.

From what I've heard, you're better off with the kit lens than the 17-85.

 

[froot]

From what I've heard, you're better off with the kit lens than the 17-85.

Hmm.... I don't see how anything can be worse than the 18-55 that I got with the 450D
The 17-85 comes standard with the 7D and 60D... how can it be that bad?

 

[ChrisJ]

Hmm.... I don't see how anything can be worse than the 18-55 that I got with the 450D
The 17-85 comes standard with the 7D and 60D... how can it be that bad?

I got the 17-85 with my 20d years ago, I used it for a bit on the 50d but decided that it was not worth keeping. It seems the extra cost over the 18-55 kit lens went into the IS and not the optics and construction. It gets pretty bad pincushioning and barrel distortion and very bad CA in the corners, the sharpness is average only when stopped down a bit. Take a look at the 24-105 f/4 L, I have been very happy with it since I got it a few months ago. If I need wider, then I use a 10-20.

 

[froot]

I got the 17-85 with my 20d years ago, I used it for a bit on the 50d but decided that it was not worth keeping. It seems the extra cost over the 18-55 kit lens went into the IS and not the optics and construction. It gets pretty bad pincushioning and barrel distortion and very bad CA in the corners, the sharpness is average only when stopped down a bit. Take a look at the 24-105 f/4 L, I have been very happy with it since I got it a few months ago. If I need wider, then I use a 10-20.

Okay thanks.
I would take the 24-105 any day, however I think you missed the part where I mentioned my budget of R8000

 

[undesign]

From what I've read the 17-85 seems to be a bit of a dog.

24 on the short side is not particularly wide on crop (24-xxx). 40 on the long side is probably too wide for portrait (17-40).

 

[Yogotta B. Kidding]

Ok, so you're looking for a wide angle lens then. I'm probably the wrong person to advise on this matter since I have a 16-35 which I rarely use.

If I may ask, how does the 16-35 compare to the 24-70 (Canon), both quality and price?

 

[bwana]

If I may ask, how does the 16-35 compare to the 24-70 (Canon), both quality and price?

I opted for the sigma 24-70 over the canon so I'm not really in a position to offer much in the way of an answer. The 16-35 really is a fantastic lens but probably the one I use least of all.

Now if you were going to ask out of the sigma and canon 24-70's I think is better then that would be easy . . . the sigma.

 

[koffiejunkie]

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM - 'nuff said! It's pricey, but it's a damn fine specimen, and the best thing you can do for your 7D

That said, I'll throw my £900 behind the 24-105L too. I own one and love it. That said, I *am* going to get the 17-55mm f/2.8 too. Unless Canon unloads the mythical 3D on us first...

NOTE: be aware that 24mm is not particularly wide on a crop body. Try one out and make sure it's wide enough if you if you're going to buy only one lens.