Reading mode: Light Dark

EF-S 18-55mm replacement

Go to last post
S

sevendollars

Member
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Location
US
Hi,

I have just broken the standard lens that came with my 350D. Its was a good all round llens, it did feel a bit standard issue in terms of results, in the sense that everyone us using the same lens for the 350d. I have started to use a 50mm fixed and felt much more comfortable, its gives me a feeling like my old manual slr. However the 18-55mm was great for wide shots and being flexible, the 50mm fixed definitely doesn't offer this.

I am looking for recommendations based on this. Something flexible in terms of use, but maybe getting away from the standard 18-55mm lens.

Thanks

Ben
 
I take it Tamron 17-50 f2.8 for ~$600 is the current trendy replacement. I'm poor, so I'll be getting Sigma 17-70, which is ~$250, also has a great IQ and even a bit more range!
 
sevendollars said:
Hi,

I have just broken the standard lens that came with my 350D. Its
was a good all round llens, it did feel a bit standard issue in
terms of results, in the sense that everyone us using the same lens
for the 350d. I have started to use a 50mm fixed and felt much more
comfortable, its gives me a feeling like my old manual slr. However
Click to expand...
On 350d, to get equivalent of "normal" fied of view of a full frame SLR you'd rather need a 30mm lens.
 
Have you read Phil's review of the 350D? I missed this the first time too as I usually skip to the photographic tests (ISO). He wrote:

"The Mark II lens appears to have had improvements made to corner sharpness at maximum aperture and light fall-off (vignetting) at maximum aperture. However it's performance at telephoto with smaller apertures is disappointing with noticeable softness and ghosting when compared to the older lens. The difficulty is that in Auto or Program AE the camera will tend to stop down in brighter light situations, if you're using the kit lens this could lead to soft looking images.
My choice

My personal favorite lens to use with the EOS 350D (Digital Rebel XT) would be the very good EF-S 17 - 85 mm F4.0 - F5.6 IS which provides big five times wide angle zoom and image stabilization, however at $600 it does push the initial price of a 350D kit to $1,500."
 
If you need a fast lens, then I would recommend the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 EX or Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. The offer pretty much the same focal length as your broken kit lens plus a larger maximum aperture at all focal length.

If your budget is less than that, take a look at the Sigma 18-125 f/3.5-5.6. Although I haven't laid my hands on one of these but I've read many great reviews about this lens. The result should be similar or even better than that from the kit lens.

Just my two cents. Good luck.

--
Sincerely,
Yohanes N. Mangitung

 
If you are looking for a direct replacement that is good and cheap, there is also the Sigma 18-50mm f3.5-5.6, which can be had on the high street in the UK for £90. This lense is cheap, and is supposed to preform better than the Canon 18-55mm. I have just exchanged my 350D with Kit lense for the 400D body only, as I am planning to buy this Sigma lense, and don't really beed to lenses in that focal range.

Hope this helps also.
 
Thanks for the recommendations. I will look though each one and see what's best for me. At the moment these seem like good choices.

Tamron 17-50 f2.8 $415.95
Sigma 17-70 f/2.8 - 4.5 $359.95

Cheers

Ben
 
I recently bought the Sigma 17-70mm. After a week I wasn't satisfied with it and returned it for the Tamron 17-50mm. HUGE difference. I'm not sure if I had a bad copy of the Sigma or not, but the Tamron is a very large improvement, and the MTF graphs at photozone.de agree.

I suggest you get the Tamron
 
Thanks again for the replies. I am looking at prices for Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II online.

I have seen this : http://www.preferredphoto.com/product.asp?id=tm175028xrafc&pid=prodincluded

why is it so cheap? Is it because its an import?

Seems like the prices are more around the $400 mark?

http://www.hotbuyselectronics.com/item_detail.php?item_id=112747

http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?omid=103&ref=froogle&utm_source=Froogle&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=TM1750XRDIEOS&sku=TM1750XRDIEOS

Any advice is much appreciated.

Thanks

Ben
 
EF-S/DC/Di II/DX make much more sense for a 1.6x user in this focal range than does the EF lens.
EF 17-40 f/4L USM ~$680

For $410-$450 the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 EX DC and Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 XR Di II both are just as sharp, have greater zoom range, and 1 stop greater maximum aperture. For $510 the EF-S 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS USM gives even greater zoom range and IS but gives up 0-1 stop and some barrel distortion at 17. $390 for the Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro = greater range, faster aperture, closer focusing than EF 17-40 f/4L.
Rock Lee said:
Reviews:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=3&sort=7&cat=27&page=1
Click to expand...
 
Ben,

Not long after I got my 300D kit, I purchased the Sigma 18-125mm as my walkaround lens for quite a while.

Recently I got the 17-55mm IS, and have been using that for a bit....

I like the 'fast' zoom of 2.8, but miss the range of the 18-125mm.

Unfortunately, I've come to the conclusion that my pictures don't justify the $1500cdn price tag on the 17-55IS (yet). I still need a lot of improvement. So does the AF of the 300D and 2.8 lenses.

For standard snapshots, the 18-125mm won't disappoint.

P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top