Travel / walk around lens for my EOS 600D

Hi all,

I currently own an EOS 600D with:

- 18-55mm IS II

- 55-250mm IS II

- 50mm prime lens

Because my 18-55mm lens has autofocus problems, so I am looking to buy a new lens. I am going on a long holiday later this year and will be doing some multiple day hikes. Becuase of that, I am looking for a lens with more zoom range so I don't have to take multiple lenses with me. I'm a enthousiastic amateur photographer, I'm not into video shooting, so that's not important to me.

I've done some online research and also visited some camera stores. Currently, I am looking at the following options:

- Canon 18-135mm IS STM

- Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.0 DC MACRO OS HSM | Contemporary

- Sigma 18-300mm F3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM | Contemporary

The last one would be replacing my 55-250mm IS II lens as well, so that would be a multipurpouse lens.

I am wondering about your experiences with these lenses and hope to get some insights from users! Also, if you guys have other tips, they are more than welcome, my budget is 3-400 euros. From what i've read, optically the Sigma 17-70mm would be best, followed by the 18-135mm lens. Because of the long range of the 18-300mm lens, optical quality would be less.

With regards to my zoom range, i'd prefer the 18-135mm lens, but would this be a good choice with regards to optical quality? I would like to make a step forward over the 18-55mm lens which I currently have.

With regards to the 18-300mm lens, I must admit that the option of having one lens with that focal range would be great. On the other hand, I don't want to sacrifice on image quality and switchting to the 55-250mm lens would be no problem for me. Do you guys know how the 18-300mm lens performs in comparison to the kit lens combi I currently have and to the 18-135mm STM lens?

I know that there are more topics about the lenses individually, and I've read a lot, but I'm having a hard time figuring out what to do.

Thanks in advance!

Peter

If you do want to go with the 18-135mm IS USM, B&H has a nice used one for half the price of a new one.

Third party lenses are fine if they are fine-tuned.

User Experience of Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM C

1Dx4me wrote:

a canon 24-105mm f4.0 "L", preferably refurbished by canon to save money! this is an excellent range lens for walk around and daily activity with high IQ, much better than ef-s lenses, and someday when you upgrade to FF camera, 24-105 will fit nicely. i personally stay away from 3rd party lenses due to sometime AF compatibility with canon cameras! YMMV.

Wave forest wrote:

Third party lenses are fine if they are fine-tuned.

User Experience of Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM C

1Dx4me wrote:

a canon 24-105mm f4.0 "L", preferably refurbished by canon to save money! this is an excellent range lens for walk around and daily activity with high IQ, much better than ef-s lenses, and someday when you upgrade to FF camera, 24-105 will fit nicely. i personally stay away from 3rd party lenses due to sometime AF compatibility with canon cameras! YMMV.

Not all of them. I had a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 that was just inconsistent, so no amount of AFMA would help - sometimes it got the focus right, other times it didn't.

From what I can tell, this is not a particularly unusual experience with Sigma lenses on Canon. It doesn't affect all lenses, but it certainly affects a lot Sigma lenses than Canon lenses.

Colin

Andy01 wrote:

Wave forest wrote:

Third party lenses are fine if they are fine-tuned.

User Experience of Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM C

1Dx4me wrote:

a canon 24-105mm f4.0 "L", preferably refurbished by canon to save money! this is an excellent range lens for walk around and daily activity with high IQ, much better than ef-s lenses, and someday when you upgrade to FF camera, 24-105 will fit nicely. i personally stay away from 3rd party lenses due to sometime AF compatibility with canon cameras! YMMV.

Not all of them. I had a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 that was just inconsistent, so no amount of AFMA would help - sometimes it got the focus right, other times it didn't.

From what I can tell, this is not a particularly unusual experience with Sigma lenses on Canon. It doesn't affect all lenses, but it certainly affects a lot Sigma lenses than Canon lenses.

Colin

The point is that F4.0 at 600D is too slow. It is equivalent to F5.6 at a full-frame camera. It is almost no use for locations such as museums, aquariums, botanic green houses, and streets in evening. There are not many Canon relatively fast lenses for their APS-C cameras.

Wave forest wrote:

Andy01 wrote:

Wave forest wrote:

Third party lenses are fine if they are fine-tuned.

User Experience of Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM C

1Dx4me wrote:

a canon 24-105mm f4.0 "L", preferably refurbished by canon to save money! this is an excellent range lens for walk around and daily activity with high IQ, much better than ef-s lenses, and someday when you upgrade to FF camera, 24-105 will fit nicely. i personally stay away from 3rd party lenses due to sometime AF compatibility with canon cameras! YMMV.

Not all of them. I had a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 that was just inconsistent, so no amount of AFMA would help - sometimes it got the focus right, other times it didn't.

From what I can tell, this is not a particularly unusual experience with Sigma lenses on Canon. It doesn't affect all lenses, but it certainly affects a lot Sigma lenses than Canon lenses.

Colin

The point is that F4.0 at 600D is too slow. It is equivalent to F5.6 at a full-frame camera. It is almost no use for locations such as museums, aquariums, botanic green houses, and streets in evening. There are not many Canon relatively fast lenses for their APS-C cameras.

”Too slow?” Please explain how you know this to be true.

Rexgig0 wrote:

Wave forest wrote:

Andy01 wrote:

Wave forest wrote:

Third party lenses are fine if they are fine-tuned.

User Experience of Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM C

1Dx4me wrote:

a canon 24-105mm f4.0 "L", preferably refurbished by canon to save money! this is an excellent range lens for walk around and daily activity with high IQ, much better than ef-s lenses, and someday when you upgrade to FF camera, 24-105 will fit nicely. i personally stay away from 3rd party lenses due to sometime AF compatibility with canon cameras! YMMV.

Not all of them. I had a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 that was just inconsistent, so no amount of AFMA would help - sometimes it got the focus right, other times it didn't.

From what I can tell, this is not a particularly unusual experience with Sigma lenses on Canon. It doesn't affect all lenses, but it certainly affects a lot Sigma lenses than Canon lenses.

Colin

The point is that F4.0 at 600D is too slow. It is equivalent to F5.6 at a full-frame camera. It is almost no use for locations such as museums, aquariums, botanic green houses, and streets in evening. There are not many Canon relatively fast lenses for their APS-C cameras.

”Too slow?” Please explain how you know this to be true.

Actually, I did some research and it was summarised here . But, it is subjective. Note, the OP was talking about 600D.

Wave forest wrote:

Rexgig0 wrote:

Wave forest wrote:

Andy01 wrote:

Wave forest wrote:

Third party lenses are fine if they are fine-tuned.

User Experience of Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM C

1Dx4me wrote:

a canon 24-105mm f4.0 "L", preferably refurbished by canon to save money! this is an excellent range lens for walk around and daily activity with high IQ, much better than ef-s lenses, and someday when you upgrade to FF camera, 24-105 will fit nicely. i personally stay away from 3rd party lenses due to sometime AF compatibility with canon cameras! YMMV.

Not all of them. I had a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 that was just inconsistent, so no amount of AFMA would help - sometimes it got the focus right, other times it didn't.

From what I can tell, this is not a particularly unusual experience with Sigma lenses on Canon. It doesn't affect all lenses, but it certainly affects a lot Sigma lenses than Canon lenses.

Colin

The point is that F4.0 at 600D is too slow. It is equivalent to F5.6 at a full-frame camera. It is almost no use for locations such as museums, aquariums, botanic green houses, and streets in evening. There are not many Canon relatively fast lenses for their APS-C cameras.

”Too slow?” Please explain how you know this to be true.

Actually, I did some research and it was summarised here . But, it is subjective. Note, the OP was talking about 600D.

You are right about one thing - it is subjective.

I first got my 24-105L when I had a 600D. Up until recently (apart from my ill-fated Sigma 17-50 f2.8) the fastest lens I owned was probably f3.5 and that was only only for the first few mm of the zoom range.

Sorry to burst your bubble and dispute your "research" (not that your linked thread to which you got a single reply qualifies as conclusive research) but I have been using lenses that were "too slow" since 1991 then. I have used those lenses for museums, night photography, aquariums, green houses, botanic gardens, weddings, family functions etc etc.

Did I sometimes wish for a faster lens - of course I did. That is why I now have a 22mm f2 for my M5 and 35mm f2 IS for my FF. I still use my "too slow" zooms far more often than the faster primes.

To say that f4 is too slow for a 600D is a very broad sweeping statement that is somewhat misleading. It is like telling someone that anything other than a f1.4 prime is useless. If a person is buying a lens to use specifically on a 600D (or most bodies for that matter) for indoor functions without flash, then I would agree with you, but I don't think this was ever implied.

For most people a general purpose lens is exactly that and has to cover a large range of functions, and there is almost always a compromise - that is what photography is all about. If someone could make a reasonably priced 11-150mm f1.4 lens the same size and weight as a 24-105mm they would make a killing, but I think it is somewhat unlikely.

A bit like your misleading statement that third party lenses are fine if they are fine-tuned - also not accurate, and especially so on a 600D that has no facility to fine tune any lens, third or otherwise.

Colin

Wave forest wrote:

The point is that F4.0 at 600D is too slow. It is equivalent to F5.6 at a full-frame camera.

OK, I pruned it down to the above two sentences. This is the part I would like to ask about, please. How do you know this to be true? I am questioning the math/science.

Steve Balcombe wrote:

Rexgig0 wrote:

Wave forest wrote:

The point is that F4.0 at 600D is too slow. It is equivalent to F5.6 at a full-frame camera.

OK, I pruned it down to the above two sentences. This is the part I would like to ask about, please. How do you know this to be true? I am questioning the math/science.

A full explanation of equivalence would be a very long post, and not necessary because there are numerous online resources. Closest to hand, and from a trusted source, is https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/what-is-equivalence-and-why-should-i-care

But the conclusion is very simple to state - in terms of both total light collected (which is fundamental to image quality) and depth of field control, a 1.6x crop sensor requires a lens which is approximately 1 1/3 stops faster to get the same result as full frame. That's in conjunction with the better known and generally better understood focal length equivalence.

So an f/4 lens on a 600D gives the same performance (in those respects) as an f/6.3 lens on full frame. People often round the difference to one stop, which is where the f/5.6 figure comes from, but it's actually slightly worse than that.

And....if you don't have a FF camera or shoot other formats then....who cares what the equivalence is....

1Dx4me wrote:

Wave forest wrote:

Andy01 wrote:

Wave forest wrote:

Third party lenses are fine if they are fine-tuned.

User Experience of Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM C

1Dx4me wrote:

a canon 24-105mm f4.0 "L", preferably refurbished by canon to save money! this is an excellent range lens for walk around and daily activity with high IQ, much better than ef-s lenses, and someday when you upgrade to FF camera, 24-105 will fit nicely. i personally stay away from 3rd party lenses due to sometime AF compatibility with canon cameras! YMMV.

Not all of them. I had a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 that was just inconsistent, so no amount of AFMA would help - sometimes it got the focus right, other times it didn't.

From what I can tell, this is not a particularly unusual experience with Sigma lenses on Canon. It doesn't affect all lenses, but it certainly affects a lot Sigma lenses than Canon lenses.

Colin

The point is that F4.0 at 600D is too slow. It is equivalent to F5.6 at a full-frame camera. It is almost no use for locations such as museums, aquariums, botanic green houses, and streets in evening. There are not many Canon relatively fast lenses for their APS-C cameras.

this shot proves your theory wrong! i used my canon 17-40 f4.0 on my 40D, f6.3, 1/20 shutter speed! this was a pretty dark spot, dark as ambient light of a museum!. sounds like you don't have or used an f4.0 lens on a aps-c camera. i have numerous shots to prove you wrong:

Good shot and kudos to you.

Can you show me something with your F4.0 on 40D like that:

As I explained here , the old 18-55mm f3.5 - 5.6 IS struggled and I wasn't happy with those primes. I wished I could have a lens a bit wider.

A bit like your misleading statement that third party lenses are fine if they are fine-tuned - also not accurate, and especially so on a 600D that has no facility to fine tune any lens, third or otherwise.

Colin

You need to have a USB dock to re-set parameters for the lens firmware. For new lenses from either Sigma or Tamron, they can be fine tuned, not to tune those lenses with a camera.

Wave forest wrote:

1Dx4me wrote:

Wave forest wrote:

Andy01 wrote:

Wave forest wrote:

Third party lenses are fine if they are fine-tuned.

User Experience of Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM C

1Dx4me wrote:

a canon 24-105mm f4.0 "L", preferably refurbished by canon to save money! this is an excellent range lens for walk around and daily activity with high IQ, much better than ef-s lenses, and someday when you upgrade to FF camera, 24-105 will fit nicely. i personally stay away from 3rd party lenses due to sometime AF compatibility with canon cameras! YMMV.

Not all of them. I had a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 that was just inconsistent, so no amount of AFMA would help - sometimes it got the focus right, other times it didn't.

From what I can tell, this is not a particularly unusual experience with Sigma lenses on Canon. It doesn't affect all lenses, but it certainly affects a lot Sigma lenses than Canon lenses.

Colin

The point is that F4.0 at 600D is too slow. It is equivalent to F5.6 at a full-frame camera. It is almost no use for locations such as museums, aquariums, botanic green houses, and streets in evening. There are not many Canon relatively fast lenses for their APS-C cameras.

this shot proves your theory wrong! i used my canon 17-40 f4.0 on my 40D, f6.3, 1/20 shutter speed! this was a pretty dark spot, dark as ambient light of a museum!. sounds like you don't have or used an f4.0 lens on a aps-c camera. i have numerous shots to prove you wrong:

Good shot and kudos to you.

Can you show me something with your F4.0 on 40D like that:

As I explained here , the old 18-55mm f3.5 - 5.6 IS struggled and I wasn't happy with those primes. I wished I could have a lens a bit wider.

Here is one that is not with a 40D, but it is with a "way too slow" lens, and it was handheld to boot.

Colin

Wave forest wrote:

A bit like your misleading statement that third party lenses are fine if they are fine-tuned - also not accurate, and especially so on a 600D that has no facility to fine tune any lens, third or otherwise.

Colin

You need to have a USB dock to re-set parameters for the lens firmware. For new lenses from either Sigma or Tamron, they can be fine tuned, not to tune those lenses with a camera.

Fair point. The only 3rd party lens I have owned (quite briefly) was a Sigma 17-50 f2.8, which I believe, was not compatible with the dock. I think there is still a lot of these third party lenses that are not compatible with the docks, which renders them unable to be fine tuned on Rebel cameras.

The dock is also an additional expense, and does not address where a lens is just unpredictable - as was the case with my Sigma.

Colin