Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

[Paulstw]

Folks,

I have been busting my chops recently over the thought of getting a replacement for the 18-55 kit that went with my last camera sale. I've been using the Tamron 70-300 VC for weeks now, and everyday so that focal length is seriously constricting my field of view.

I really am missing doing landscape stuff, general walk about architecture and portraits.

I will be getting rid of the 50mm 1.8 because the focus speed does my head in as well as the noise.

So two schools of thought...

A lens over budget choice, and a lens because of budget choice if that's ok?

I want a lens that's going to work well with the 7D and not cripple it. I did consider just getting another kit lens on Ebay but I feel its going backward a bit, and we all want to create better quality images. :)

Cheers,

Paul

[S_J_P]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

You've already sold one kit-lens, do you want to sell another? I'd suggest going for a decent quality lens which will see you through your next camera upgrade rather than going the budget way. In order of outlay, I'd suggest...

The old EF 17-85 is a decent budget choice, but my bet is you'll be upgrading again in no time.

Canon's 15-85 is a cracking lens, with a useful focal length range, as so long as you don't shoot wide-open it's very good optically. It's a great walkabout lens, and goes usefully wider that the usual 17- or 18- brigade. It won't see you through a camera upgrade though.

An EF 17-40 L is ideal for landscapes, is relatively inexpensive (for L glass), and is compatible with full-frame if and when you upgrade. Optical quality is excellent (especially on a crop-sensor body), but It just doesn't get my juices flowing.

The EF 24-105 L's an absolute belter of a lens and my go-to lens of choice for days out, some say it's not wide enough on a crop body, I say step-backwards ;-) Optically it's superb, and is good value too, it'll stand you in good stead if and when you upgrade your body as well.

An EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 was a very close second-choice for me when I bought my 17-40 L and by all accounts is a good lens, but it's crop sensor compatible only and so won't be any use if/when you upgrade to full frame.

Whatever route you go, you'll have to compromise on focal-range, image-quality, convenience or price to some degree. Do you know anybody who might be able to lend you something to see what sort of compromise you'd be willing to live with?

For what it's worth I went from 18-55 kit lens, through 15-85, to 17-40 & 24-105 and wish I'd missed-out the 15-85 step as it was costly!

EDIT: How about an EF-40 f/2.8 STM to replace your 50 and an EF10-22 ultra wide angle as a slightly different approach?

[Paulstw]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

You've already sold one kit-lens, do you want to sell another? I'd suggest going for a decent quality lens which will see you through your next camera upgrade rather than going the budget way. In order of outlay, I'd suggest...

The old EF 17-85 is a decent budget choice, but my bet is you'll be upgrading again in no time.

Canon's 15-85 is a cracking lens, with a useful focal length range, as so long as you don't shoot wide-open it's very good optically. It's a great walkabout lens, and goes usefully wider that the usual 17- or 18- brigade. It won't see you through a camera upgrade though.

An EF 17-40 L is ideal for landscapes, is relatively inexpensive (for L glass), and is compatible with full-frame if and when you upgrade. Optical quality is excellent (especially on a crop-sensor body), but It just doesn't get my juices flowing.

The EF 24-105 L's an absolute belter of a lens and my go-to lens of choice for days out, some say it's not wide enough on a crop body, I say step-backwards ;-) Optically it's superb, and is good value too, it'll stand you in good stead if and when you upgrade your body as well.

An EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 was a very close second-choice for me when I bought my 17-40 L and by all accounts is a good lens, but it's crop sensor compatible only and so won't be any use if/when you upgrade to full frame.

Whatever route you go, you'll have to compromise on focal-range, image-quality, convenience or price to some degree. Do you know anybody who might be able to lend you something to see what sort of compromise you'd be willing to live with?

For what it's worth I went from 18-55 kit lens, through 15-85, to 17-40 & 24-105 and wish I'd missed-out the 15-85 step as it was costly!

EDIT: How about an EF-40 f/2.8 STM to replace your 50 and an EF10-22 ultra wide angle as a slightly different approach?

Thanks for all that info :) I've been reading a few of your replies already on similar subjects and very informative. I nearly pulled the trigger on a Sigma 8-16 based on your excitement lol

My plan initially was the 17-40L as on crop it would be close to the 24-70 range and be very good for Landscape on FF, however I'd be then putting undue pressure on myself for a FF. I'm more than happy with the 7D at present.

17-55 2.8 is crazy expensive and so is the 15-85. The 17-85 seems to get sidelined a lot in favour of the 15-85.

The 24-105L seems to me too shallow a FOV for landscapes however AndyA gets amazing results from his. I did try it on the 7D in Jessops and was blown away with the focus speed. It was mindblowing.

I really don't know what to do :/

[Montana 5]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

Hi Paul, I bought the 17-40L for my 7D about 2 years ago and absolutely love it, its a real peach of a Lens, in fact I hardly ever take it off, I also find it brilliant for HD Video. My Tamron 28-300 was ideal for walkabout, though not the best or fastest Lens, it was ok, though I did find the Auto Focus hunted quite a bit.

Doug.

[Paulstw]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

Hi Paul, I bought the 17-40L for my 7D about 2 years ago and absolutely love it, its a real peach of a Lens, in fact I hardly ever take it off, I also find it brilliant for HD Video. My Tamron 28-300 was ideal for walkabout, though not the best or fastest Lens, it was ok, though I did find the Auto Focus hunted quite a bit.

Doug.

Ahh A fellow Scot :)

When I thought about it, the 17-40 f4L looked like a great idea. It's great focal length for portraits, and on a FF its a great wide angle. However on crop it might be ok for a walk about focal range. Is this your experience of it?

[MX5]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

I have both the 17-40L and 24-105L and in my hands I'd say there's little to choose (quality-wise) between them in day-to-day photography. I just select which one will do the job. Both are very well built. Not wide enough ... then stitch a few images ... which makes the 24-105L a better choice for the tele end. Oh the 24-105L has IS if that matters to you.

[Montana 5]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

Ahh A fellow Scot :)

When I thought about it, the 17-40 f4L looked like a great idea. It's great focal length for portraits, and on a FF its a great wide angle. However on crop it might be ok for a walk about focal range. Is this your experience of it?

Yes definitely, I attend around 15-20 Car Shows per year, I used to annoy the hell out of people by pulling back the ropes and tapes to get my shot, now I don't need to, which saves loads of time on Photo Shop. Another example where I thought I would be caught out without a longer Lens was at Troon Beach, the Board Surfers were flying through the air, quite close to the shore, the 17-40 was ideal. I also do the odd bit of publicity shots when My Car Clubs have had a guest speaker, all in a days work for my favourite Lens.

Doug.

[Les McLean]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

I really think you need to sit down, relax , reflect and take a long view. Decide where your photography is going over the next few years, and start building up your gear to meet that aim. So for example if your main interest is going to be landscapes, you probably will be thinking of a FF body, wideish lenses, tripod, filters etc. If portraits, perhaps fast primes/zooms, speed lights, brolly etc.

So set your stall out, and then gradually build your kit up, seeking advice where needed.

Some general thoughts on lenses:-
Buy the best you can afford it will save tears (and money) in the long run.
Don't rule out third party lenses, makes like Sigma produce some excellent glass
It's horses for courses, no lens will cover all your bases, some lenses try to do that, with obvious compromises, usually in IQ.
Most of my lenses have been bought secondhand, one of them (300 F2.8L) is probably older than you are, but still produces images so sharp that you cut yourself on it, so don't rule out buying used lenses, most good glass (Canon L for example) are built to last.


For your immediate concern, my thoughts would be 24-70 F2.8L (Mk1) and/or 17-40 F4L, those two would cover your bases regarding landscapes/portraits (esp on a crop body).

Don't rush to get rid of your 50mm F1.8, yes they are cheap and cheerful, but they can be a get of jail lens, so for example you are shooting a low light gig, it can get you shots that would be extremely difficult with slower lenses. I'd at least hang onto it until you are in a position to replace (with a 50mm F1.4 for example)

I know the 24-105F4L is a well regarded lens, but I've never been able to get away with it, probably more down to me than the lens.

Anyway, plenty of good advice in the thread.

[Petros]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

The 17-85 seems to get sidelined

You are correct in this statement, but in my view it is still a good lens - certainly a big step up from the kit lens. The 15 - 85 has received good reviews, and although better than the 17 - 85 there have been many posts as to whether there is enough improvement to justify the much higher price, although that may have been more relevant when the 15 - 85 was first introduced.

You can pick up a used 17 - 85 for around £200 - £250 - it is worth trying to find a copy that has had the internal wiring loom replaced as this is a known fault that shows on lenses around 4 -5 years or so - it did on mine and it cost £95 to have it repaired.

Peter

[Paulstw]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

You can pick up a used 17 - 85 for around £200 - £250 - it is worth trying to find a copy that has had the internal wiring loom replaced as this is a known fault that shows on lenses around 4 -5 years or so - it did on mine and it cost £95 to have it repaired.

Peter

I saw one on Gumtree for £50 and the guy is happy for me to take it off his hands. He's mentioned that the aperture is stuck open and that's to do with the wiring loom. I saw quite a few videos on how to change it and i'm fairly comfy with how to do it. I do after all take laptops apart and put them back together everyday :)

I can't not give it a try for £50. Even if it doesn't work the lens still works :)

@Les
Thanks for the info Les, invaluable indeed. I am going to take it easy after I get a walk around lens and keep the 50mm. I just took a portrait of my GF for her works new website, and I was stunned at the sharpness, so its getting kept.

Cheers for the info everyone and I'll let you know how I get on tomorrow after I pick up this lens.

Paul

[antoeknee]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

I currently use Sigma 10-20 for my landscape shots and think the IQ is very good. Have the 24-105L and think on crop sensor the FOV isn't really best suited for landscape stuff.

[briansquibb]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

Howaboat the 10-22 if you must have a zoom. Else consider non zooms for lighter weight and better photos

[Nathaniel]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

Very sound advice from Les, for all photographers to take note of.

[briansquibb]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

Very sound advice from Les, for all photographers to take note of.

For those with a 1.6 cameras (ie 7D) neither the 24-70/105 nor the 17-40 are truly wide angle. Both these are fine on ff camera bodies - but on a 1.6 crop I would suggest a 14mm or less option for wide angle.

[PhotoStory]

Re: Lens for Landscapes and portraits - walkabout

Les' advice is sound.

I to have a mild temptation to buy more lenses, on top of the monthly costs that I spend on general photographic 'stuff' and I have to restrain myself. I look at 'L' lenses and review the fantastic images others post using them, but if I am honest to myself, do I really need another lens? No, I'm at no point in my photographic 'career' to commit to more gear, especially expensive professional level equipment, I'd love to have a 5D Mk3 and range of prime and zoom 'L' lenses, but I just can't justify it and my existing equipment has the potential to produce far better images than I currently do.
I was reading an article recently written by a well known professional portrait photographer and his advice was to avoid buying extensive amounts of pricey equipment, which is where most amateurs go wrong and build up mountains of debt, especially those attempting to turn professional; his advice for someone starting out was to buy an old 5D Mk1, 50mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8, that's all you'd need.