Opinions Please

Best walk around lens for 40D for around $500? What do you guys recommend?

(Message edited by wake_upppp on December 15, 2009)

The 2 that I use are the Canon 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS & a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, both under $500. If you had $1,200 to spend I would get the Canon 24-105 L f/4 IS.

I like Randy's picks, if you can go a little more the new Canon 15-85 IS is nice as well.

Well all the reading reviews pays off. Those three were on my list. Randy, between the Canon and the Tamron, any preference? Thanks guys.

I have both the 17-85 and the 28-135 and love them both. If it were my only one though, I'd go for the 17-85 because I love the wideness

Anyone know about the Tamron 17-50 2.8 that has the vibration control? The specs are different than the Tamron 2.8 without VC. It seems it has higher quality components. B&H has it for $625. The closest Canon is the 17-55 F/2.8 USM IS, but it's $990. How well will the Tamron actually perform wide open at 2.8 is what I'm not sure of.

Sparky, I like them both depending on conditions, If I know I will be shooting in good light I like the 28-135 for the added reach, If I think I will be shooting indoors or in low light I perfer the Tamron 2.8. I don't have the Vibration control on mine but it's a pretty fast lens and very sharp so its not an issue for me. Check out http://www.fredmiranda.com for good deals on used lenses. You could probably pick up both the Canon and Tamron for about $600 to $650 but they go fast.

I'd check Tokina also.. they probably make something similar to a 28-135 and it is probably 2.8.

When I go on vacation I take the Canon 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS with a nice light XSi body and it works great for almost everything. You can find 28-135's cheap when people buy them with a 40D and 50D kit and dump them.

Found this on the FM forum, another vote for the 28-135, You can pick up a good used one for under $250.

"Anyone feel that there are underrated gems in the Canon lens lineup?

I'll stick my neck out, I bought a Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM because I needed a cheap wide range zoom for a particular project. I didn't expect too much from this lens because it was affordable, not an L, with a wide range. Also I use it on a 5D2 which is sure to test any lenses' resolution, and with a FM review rating of 7.8 I didn't expect anything impressive.

Well, as you can guess I am blown away by this lens. While no lens is perfect, at f8 this cheap zoom looks satisfyingly sharp to me, and I am a completely retentive pixel peeper, my middle name is 100%."

tough one.. the only l-lense is the 17-40 and its a bit to wide angle for portraits and not enough reach.

i have a 70-200is f4 and 24-70 f2.8 and that 24-70 is on my camera 90% of the time.

i would maybe look at canon 85mm prime

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=246&sort=7&cat=43&page=2

I've shot with this lens before and it's nice for the money. The copy I used would hunt in low light once in awhile-missing focus, but that was the only drawback to it. Nice and sharp, otherwise.

Thanks again guys. I do want the 24-105 L, but just can't right now. Just picked up the 70-200 f/4 L so have to save up for another L, so sticking with my 18-200 IS. It's a little heavy for a walk around, but I do like having the range if I need it. I'll pick up the L later then prolly sell the 18-200 and put it towards the new one. Happy Holidays!