EOS 200D (SL2) + Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS STM = overkill?

Hi all!

I am using Canon EOS 200D (SL2) + kit 18-55 II. I am thinking of upgrading my lens for general purposes: travel, portrait, landscape, basically an all-rounder lens.

I have budgeted around 400-500 USD for this upgrade, considering price and quality, I have narrowed down the option to these two lenses:

- Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 (new)
or
- Canon EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM (used)

Considering the new Sigma costs approximately the same as used Canon (at least in where I live), I am thinking Canon might be a better choice.

But I am not sure if this Canon lens is "overkill" for a tiny little entry level EOS 200D body? Or should I go with Sigma? Or should I get a used Sigma, or is there perhaps an even wiser option out there?

Thanks!

I also own and use the SL2. I’m not sure what you hope to gain by replacing your 18-55 with either of the 17-55’s? The only advantage that I can see is the 17-55’s are a bit faster. FWIW, I use the Canon 15-85. I like having a bit wider and longer lens than the kit lens. For my usage, takes care of 90% of my needs. YMMV.

Jackson Storm wrote:

Tom Stephenson wrote:

I also own and use the SL2. I’m not sure what you hope to gain by replacing your 18-55 with either of the 17-55’s? The only advantage that I can see is the 17-55’s are a bit faster. FWIW, I use the Canon 15-85. I like having a bit wider and longer lens than the kit lens. For my usage, takes care of 90% of my needs. YMMV.

Hi Tom.
The focal length of my current 18-55 II kit fits my purpose just right, but I think extra f-stop might be nice cause I occasionally shot at the night.
The additional IS feature sounds very nice too.
And also this might be just me, but I just have a thing with bokeh haha. The kit can also give a nice creamy bokeh but I had to get creepily close to the subject.

Btw thanks for your suggestion on Canon 15-85 ^_^

Well, basically it is 2 stops at the long end. Like 1/30s vs. 1/125 s diference. It has a substantial body, but I like its IQ and speed a lot. It is known for soaking dust a bit, so I covered it with an UV filter, done.

guinness2 wrote:

Well, basically it is 2 stops at the long end. Like 1/30s vs. 1/125 s diference. It has a substantial body, but I like its IQ and speed a lot. It is known for soaking dust a bit, so I covered it with an UV filter, done.

A UV filter will keep dust off of the front of the lens but not out of the inside of the lens body. Most of the dust gets in around the zoom and focus rings.

Jackson Storm wrote:

JPAlbert wrote:

Why not the EF-s 18-135 ??

Because it is fairly limited on the f-stop and I occasionally shot at night. So extra f-stop might be nice. Also I just love bokehhh

If you want bokeh why not get a fast prime? 50mm f1.8?

You can buy the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 ART used for around $500. Then pick up a 50mm f/1.8 STM for under $100 (used). You will be all set then!

Jackson Storm wrote:

Because it is fairly limited on the f-stop and I occasionally shot at night. So extra f-stop might be nice. Also I just love bokehhh

You're confusing the term bokeh with shallow depth of field. They are not the same. Bokeh is used to describe the quality of the out of focus areas. Smooth bokeh, nervous bokeh etc.