Looking for a target lens (Target to save up to)

[alfa147x]

I need a walk around lens to replace my 18-55 kit lens on my 30d
I would like to upgrade my kit lens as it is my most used lens, I shoot a wide verity of things for example:

School events
High School football
basketball
Birthdays
a lot of shots with friends
cars (Show and races)
light box shots for ebay
dances
family events
vacations

every thing in bold i plan to use a walk around lens for;
any feed back is great


my current gear:
Canon 30D
Canon 18-55 f/3.5
Canon 50mm f/1.8
Quantaray 75-300 f/4.0

I would love to get a faster lens for football but since its only in the fall and i dont get paid for the pictures i dont want to upgrade the Quantaray 75-300 f/4.0
and in the case of basketball my 50 f/1.8 does well enough

any other lens's in the $500 (used) good for walk around ?


Thanks a bunch

 

[alfa147x]

Oh I wouldn't mind a used Canon EF 28-70mm f/2.8L lens
The 4mm don't mean that much to me

 

[ElFenix]

28 is perfectly normal for APS-C, so it'd be an awkward walkaround lens. i've got the tamron 28-75, and the wide just isn't wide enough. take a look through your photos and see what % is in the 18-26 range, i bet it's a large amount.

 

[WalkingDead]

Sigma 17-70mm F/2.8-4.5 would be a great lens for your needs.

School events
High School football
basketball
Birthdays
a lot of shots with friends
cars (Show and races)
light box shots for ebay
dances
family events
vacations

I have the Nikon version this lens for the last two years. Not a bad deal for around $350. Its wide angle and 1:2.3 Macro ability is really handy for doing eBay shots.

 

[pennylane]

I and many others have the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. It only goes up to 50mm, but it has the constant f/2.8 aperture. It's a good lens. It's sharp though it does have some vignetting and CA, but that's fixable in photoshop. It also has a sort of clunky autofocus. It's not horrible, but it's not the fastest or the quietest. At $400-ish, it's a lot cheaper than other walkaround constant aperture lenses.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: fanerman91
I and many others have the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. It only goes up to 50mm, but it has the constant f/2.8 aperture. It's a good lens. It's sharp though it does have some vignetting and CA, but that's fixable in photoshop. It also has a sort of clunky autofocus. It's not horrible, but it's not the fastest or the quietest. At $400-ish, it's a lot cheaper than other walkaround constant aperture lenses.

The tamron is an excellent lens. I also like the tamron 28-75... but 28mm is not really wide enough especially on a 1.6X camera.

If you have the $$$ go for the Canon 17-55 IS f/2.8. L quality... but not called L because it is an EF-S lens. Of course it is more than 2X what a tamron costs... but a damn nice lens. And it has the nice, quite autofocus... unlike the tamron.

The 24-70 is no slouch and you would not be dissappointed... but it is heavier than the others.

But for all your uses you can't just use one lens. For basketball you will need an 85mm f/1.8, football you will need a 70-200 f/2.8. 70mm just too short to get in close.

The rest can be handled by a 24-70 or 18-50mm lens.

 

[kalster]

i have the tamron 28-75, not very wide but i take more portraits so i prefer the reach , nice little lens

 

[alfa147x]

I know tamron and all the other 3rd party manufactures but i would like this to be a canon

Is there any other lens may be shorter reach but is wider then 28?

On my XTI my walk around lens was a 28-90mm

Thanks a bunch guys!

 

[ElFenix]

the new 18-55 IS? though the contrast won't be what the 17-55 IS is.

 

[alfa147x]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
the new 18-55 IS? though the contrast won't be what the 17-55 IS is.

Im not looking for the IS feature at all, no need for it ATM
and with a budget near $1000 new or 600$ used I think I can do Better

 

[foghorn67]

Between the 17-55 2.8 IS or the 24-70L. With the L, you get awesome build quality and excellent contrast and colors out of the box, and most are known to be pretty sharp.
The 17-55 2.8 is known to be a tad sharper, the wide angle covering covering more, colors are okay, but don't compare to the L. They aren't built as tough as the L's, but it seems okay.

--edit--The 24-105 is known to be excellent. IS, L build quality, and it's actually pretty light weight. Have you thought about that?

For your football shots, you can probably pick up a used 200 2.8L for around 500-600 (IIRC) use it for football season, and sell it for probably the same amount if you don't scratch it all up.
Just thought I'd throw that out there.

 

[foghorn67]

oops

 

[imported_klong]

I'd consider buying a non EF-S lens for the day when you decide to migrate to a full frame camera. A number of good lenses are available: Canon 24-105/4L IS USM is a good choice as is Canon 17-40/4L USM (this is obviously a wider zoom, but it's a good walkaround on a cropped camera). Check some reviews on different lenses - it certainly makes sense at least doing some investigation. See

www.slrlensreview.comwww.slrlensreview.com
www.fredmiranda.comwww.fredmiranda.com
www.photography-on-the-net.comwww.photography-on-the-net.com

Good luck