Canon Rebel T3i

Hi everyone,

I'm new here, and I have a Canon rebel T3i, along with the kit lens of 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, a 50mm f/1.8 and a 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS.
I was looking to get a "walk-around" lens and I couldn't decide on a couple:

Canon 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
Canon 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

Yes, I understand that one is an L, but for the price of the other two, is the image quality that much of a difference?
and I believe that the 28 and 24 on a crop sensor will hardly give me a wide angle.

some advice would be great!

Thanks

You're right. 28mm isn't really wide at all on a crop. As for the "L" lens, most on this Site would push you to the EFs 17-55 IS instead. Same amount of money as the "L" , but a better tool for the job with the camera you currently have.

EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS or EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS. The former is better indoors, for action and for portraits because of the faster and constant f/2.8.

Welcome
I have a T2i and started with the 18-55 and 55-250 like you.
I went with a used 24-105L and have been happy with my choice.
When you first pick up the 24-105 you will think it is huge and heavy- when compared to the lenses you have, but get used to it quickly.

Suggest reading the reviews on this site. the 18-55 is small enough you could carry around with your walk around.
but maybe consider the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS or EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS Lens
and if you haven't looked at it, here's a link to Bryan's reccomendations
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/C...pose-Lens.aspx

* I had a short list of lenses and chose the best for me based on the first I could get within my budget ($750).
Although still extremely happy with my lens I have learned more about my camera and how I can use the lenses. If I was choosing today I would probably go with the 17-55.

Where will you be walking around? Outside? in the city and doing street work during the day - city park nature types, the 15-85 would be fantastic, a little more indoor lower light the 17-55 is the way to go. I have a t3i and have worked through 18-55 to the 15-85 and now have the 17-55 as I have found I am a little more indoors. With the 2.8 17-55 I find that I effectively never use the nifty fifty 1.8. I like to have it as an emergency lens (on a trip to France loaned it to another Cannonite when their 24-105 on their new 5diii stopped working).

One way to see how wide you need/want is to "walk around" with the 18-55 set on 24 and look through viewfinder, take some shots and see if you are happy w/ the 24 as the widest option. Also do the zoom from 55 to 85 and see if need/want the extra 3-4 steps of sneaker zoom saved by the 15-85. Think about your subjects, do you find yourself swapping out the 55-250 often? trying to "back out"? You won' be getting any extra speed with the 15-85 above about 40mm - 40-85 neighbor hood is still going to be above f4 - a bit of overlap with 55-250 - lastly you would/should sell the 18-55 if get either as both a significant improvements.

For what it is worth, I went "all the way" on the long side and have the 70-200 2.8 mkII, it is indeed a beast, but what a great beast, I have even put extension tubes on it and shot some macro work!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by williamli

Hi everyone,

I'm new here, and I have a Canon rebel T3i, along with the kit lens of 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, a 50mm f/1.8 and a 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS.
I was looking to get a "walk-around" lens and I couldn't decide on a couple:


Thanks

---

Hi williamli,

I have the 17-55 and I highly recommend it. Now, if you plan some trips where only one lens can be taken, you might find the 55mm a bit too short. Also, if I were you I wouldn't give up the 17-24 range as 17 isn't that wide on your camera. Therefore, I'd say the 18-135 is a very good choice if you want/need to limit the number of lenses you carry with you.

Let us know what you decide at the end.
Cheers,
S.

I bought a T2i earlier this year with the same kit lenses. After quite a bit of debate, I went for the 17-55 f/2.8 and haven't looked back. It is an awesome lens. Personally, I ruled out most of the L zoom lenses because they don't go wide enough on a crop body. 24mm would definitely not be wide enough for my walk-around lens. And I love being able to get the narrow DoF with the f/2.8.

I thought the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS was a great walk around lens. I started with it, but ending up selling it to get the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS since I do more indoor and I love the f/2.8. I don't miss losing the 55-85 as much as I thought I would since I have a 70-200 f/4L.

If you are mainly outdoors and use the flash indoors, the 15-85 is a good pick. If you are more indoors then the 17-55.

If you are only looking at your list, I would pick the Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, but still, I love the 17-55mm f/2.8.

I'm with Neuro and Busted Knukles and about 6 others. The 17-55 f/2.8 is the way to go. This is going to be your "walk around" lens. That means it needs to handle the lighting wherever you "walk around." Unless you want to leave a speedlite flash attached at all times, you will NEED and want that wide bright aperature for A LOT of your walk-around shooting. Basically anything shot indoors.

Also, the f/2.8 gives you nice background blur wide open for portraits. A variable lens that runs 3.5 to 5.6 can't do that.

This lens gives you a constant big bright aperature across its whole range, and its image quality is famously great too.

Consider used if you want to save about $150.00 to $200.00.

Good luck, and enjoy whatever you choose!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busted Knuckles

Where will you be walking around? Outside? in the city and doing street work during the day - city park nature types, the 15-85 would be fantastic, a little more indoor lower light the 17-55 is the way to go. I have a t3i and have worked through 18-55 to the 15-85 and now have the 17-55 as I have found I am a little more indoors. With the 2.8 17-55 I find that I effectively never use the nifty fifty 1.8. I like to have it as an emergency lens (on a trip to France loaned it to another Cannonite when their 24-105 on their new 5diii stopped working).

One way to see how wide you need/want is to "walk around" with the 18-55 set on 24 and look through viewfinder, take some shots and see if you are happy w/ the 24 as the widest option. Also do the zoom from 55 to 85 and see if need/want the extra 3-4 steps of sneaker zoom saved by the 15-85. Think about your subjects, do you find yourself swapping out the 55-250 often? trying to "back out"? You won' be getting any extra speed with the 15-85 above about 40mm - 40-85 neighbor hood is still going to be above f4 - a bit of overlap with 55-250 - lastly you would/should sell the 18-55 if get either as both a significant improvements.

For what it is worth, I went "all the way" on the long side and have the 70-200 2.8 mkII, it is indeed a beast, but what a great beast, I have even put extension tubes on it and shot some macro work!!!

---

Hi, Busted K's:
You should post some of your macro shots. Since you and I seem to have somehow bought exactly the same bag full of lenses, I always read your posts when I see them!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busted Knuckles

Where will you be walking around? Outside? in the city and doing street work during the day - city park nature types, the 15-85 would be fantastic, a little more indoor lower light the 17-55 is the way to go. I have a t3i and have worked through 18-55 to the 15-85 and now have the 17-55 as I have found I am a little more indoors. With the 2.8 17-55 I find that I effectively never use the nifty fifty 1.8. I like to have it as an emergency lens (on a trip to France loaned it to another Cannonite when their 24-105 on their new 5diii stopped working).

One way to see how wide you need/want is to "walk around" with the 18-55 set on 24 and look through viewfinder, take some shots and see if you are happy w/ the 24 as the widest option. Also do the zoom from 55 to 85 and see if need/want the extra 3-4 steps of sneaker zoom saved by the 15-85. Think about your subjects, do you find yourself swapping out the 55-250 often? trying to "back out"? You won' be getting any extra speed with the 15-85 above about 40mm - 40-85 neighbor hood is still going to be above f4 - a bit of overlap with 55-250 - lastly you would/should sell the 18-55 if get either as both a significant improvements.

For what it is worth, I went "all the way" on the long side and have the 70-200 2.8 mkII, it is indeed a beast, but what a great beast, I have even put extension tubes on it and shot some macro work!!!

---

Agree with everything you said.
Having said that, tomorrow morning I am going to take pictures of my 6-month old infant on a fluffy white blanket I just bought today. It will be a "tasteful" nude, shot face-on, with her little booty being visible (BUT BLURRED) in the background. She is only like 24 inches long. That is where the thind depth of field will make my cheap "nifty fifty" prove its worth!

I purchased this camera mainly for recording video. Its quality is amazing, and the on-board mic records great to me as well. For anyone wondering about the new HD digital movie zoom, I created a video demonstrating its quality and the microphone quality as well! Its on youtube. Just search for t3i digital zoom and onboard mic test.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sassygirl

I purchased this camera mainly for recording video. Its quality is amazing, and the on-board mic records great to me as well. For anyone wondering about the new HD digital movie zoom, I created a video demonstrating its quality and the microphone quality as well! Its on youtube. Just search for t3i digital zoom and onboard mic test.

---

Sassy - if you haven't done Magic Lantern you simply must - video and magic lantern is like Oreo cookies and milk.

+1