I am currently in the mode of choosing a lens for my upcoming TT to Egypt.

My inventory (and thoughts):

1) Sigma 28-135 (candidate)
2) Canon 50mm f/1.8 (will take anyway)
3) Canon 18-55 (not much in favor)
4) Tamron 70-300 (no way)

My option: Buy a Canon 17-85 IS (I know Chris will be smiling when he reads this).

My dilema: Where (what temples, interiors) will the 17-85 help me? Will my expense be justified?

Hi Xponent,

It's been a long time! Hope you enjoyed your last TT

I'm going to shock you with my suggestion...How much is the Canon 17-85??? What is the f stop? If you are looking at it for a better f stop as well as focal length, you will be pleasantly surprised to know that the Tamron 28-75mm f 2.8 compares very favourably to both Nikon and Canon lenses in this range. Plus it is not an expensive lens. I use only Nikon lenses and am (shock of shocks) purchasing the Tamron 28-75mm f 2.8 because of samples I've just viewed of images shot by professional photographers with this lens. This particular Tamron is basically the best lens they make and the people who vouch for it are people whose opinions I personally trust.

If you are looking at the Canon strictly because of the 17mm wide focal length, again take a look at the Tamron 17-35 f 2.8-4. Less expensive than the Canon and also a good lens. Search the camera forums and see what people using these Tamron lenses have to say.

Now, about your question of where will a 17-85mm (or similar) benefit you: Anywhere that you can not walk a long distance from the scene you are shooting. I love the wide ranges, a 12-24mm (Nikon) is my favourite and most used lens.

What lenses did you take on your last tour, and what were the shortcomings of these lenses? Meaning, did you miss shots because of not having a focal length you wanted? I think this is the best way for you to make the assessment as to what lenses you should take on this next trip. You could also investigate purchasing a teleconverter, say a 2X for your Sigma (or any other lens), which would give you greater focal length coverage for minimal additional weight.

Now, what do I do??? Personally, with respect to lenses and cameras, I take them all

Best wishes,
travellor

Hello travellor,

Enjoyed my last TT quite a lot. Here are a few pics (FLICKR link).

On my last trip, I took my Sigma 18-200 and didn't have any major gripes about the range. My grief was mostly in the low-light, low shutter speed arena. It was a 3.5-6 lens, making it quite slow.

To summarize my requirements:

a) Need a good walkaround lens (should be light).
b) Would prefer to carry just 1 lens.
c) Should have good low light performance.
d) Should provide a good range.

I can see that a low constant aperture will solve the problem, but I am also tempted to try the IS for added hand-holdability. I am prepared to pay to avoid lugging multiple lenses and equipment around and changing lenses in the field; especially a place like Egypt where dust and sand is abundant.

Since I recently bought a 40D, my wife will be using the 350D with the Sigma 18-200. She loves the zooms.

One of my constraints is that I have to do with what is available locally in India. A significant percentage of the lenses available in the US are not available here, only the more popular ones. Ditto for converters. Hence my pool of candidates is really quite small.

Hi Xponent,

I love your slide show, thanks for the link! You and your wife are a beautiful couple

With respect to a constant 2.8 aperture, try some high ISO shots at home and see how the 40D responds with your Sigma. This will give you an idea of how far you can push your ISO with a "slower" lens, or one with a variable aperture. This may give you an idea of what you will need as a minimum aperture.

I'm not that familiar with the D40, but from what I recall, it handles high ISO quite well. See what an 800 ISO & 1600 image looks like with the Sigma with respect to noise and see if you are happy with the results.

Looking at the images you posted on the flicker site, you put the 18-200 through its paces with respect to the focal lengths you used. I guess one way to look at it is "what lengths can you do without", knowing your wife will have the 18-200 on her camera. You've got back up!

That's it for my pool of suggestions...hope it is of some help.

Enjoy your tour!
best wishes,
travellor

This message has been edited. Last edited by: travellor,

I have always used the following lenses on my travels (all Canons): EF17 -40mm L f4, EF28-135mm IS, EF70-200mm L f4, plus a 1.4X converter. These worked well, but I decided that I want to reduce the number of lenses I travel with, and also found IS invaluable as it is seldom possible to use a tripod. The white 70-200mm also tends to atract attention, which is not what you want for candid shots.

I now travel with just two lenses, namely a 17-85mm IS and a 70-300mm IS (on a 40D). The 17-85mm has more distortion than the 17-40, but it is very useful as a walk around lens due to the range and the excellent IS. I also enjoy the range of my 28-135mm lens,especially the longer reach, but 28mm is not wide enough for all scenes.

In summary, if you want just one travel lens, taking into consideration quality, range, weight and the advantages of image stabilising, you cannot beat the 17 -85mm.

Koot,

Thank you very much for the feedback. One of the main reasons why I started to consider the IS lens (along with the faster constant aperture ones) is because of its use in low light scenarios like a Light Show (at Karnak or Giza) and the questionable lighting conditions inside of monuments.

Today I considered the purchase of a 24mm f/2.8 lens for the exact same situation but its prohibitive cost (in India about 2x that of the US price) has quarantined that thought.

As far as the barrel distortion of the 17-85 at its lower end, that can be corrected during PP.

Xponent

I regard IS as more important in wide angle lenses than a large aperture, as you mostly want to shoot at smaller apertures for wide angle to ensure sufficient depth of field. The faster lenses also tend to be big and heavy (and obviously expensive). Speed in telephoto lenses is far more important as you normally want a shallow depth of field, I therefore have a number of fast telephoto lenses, i.e. 300mm f2.8, 500mm f4, 70-200mm f2.8, etc, but would not consider paying a lot for a fast wide angle.

I use PT Lens (as a plug-in in Photoshop) to correct distortion, and it works well, although the quality of my 17-40mm f4 lens will always be somewhat better than the 17-85mm.

Thank you both Koot and Travellor for helping me sort thru some of my mental mess.

I am going to try an IS lens today to see how well I like it. Will keep you updated.

Hi Xponent,

It's quite a decision, what lens to purchase. Looking forward to hearing the outcome!

best wishes,
travellor

Today I am in the favor of a third and much much cheaper alternative.

A monopod with my 40D and 28-135 lens. I was planning of getting one anyway, so my current mindset is to see how much it helps and then decide on the 17-85 IS.

I use a monopod regularly for sports photography with my long lenses, but doubt whether it would solve your problem when touring. I think you will find it too much of a hassle to use and carry around and you in fact might not be allowed to use it in some areas. I must say I have never seen anybody with a monopod on my overseas tours.

I carry a smallish tripod, but only use it for night photos when I explore on my own. A monopod is useless for this purpose. Is the 28 -135 that you refer to, a Canon or Sigma? I have taken a lot of photos on my tours with my Canon 28-135 IS (you can look at some of my photos on my website at www.photovibes.com ). There are some complaints about the quality of the lens, but my copy is excellent.

Without a fast or IS lens, you will find yourself shooting at higher ISO settings under low light conditions. Fortunately noise on the latest DSLR's is low (compared to for instance my old 10D)and you can shoot at higher ISO's. You can also invest in a program such as Noise Ninja, should you want to further reduce noise.

Koot,

You have a pretty neat website. The quality of your photos is fantastic.

The 28-135 is a Sigma non-IS lens. My aim to use a monopod in lieu of an IS lens is largely for low-light situations. I had to buy a monopod anyway...I will play with it once I get it. If it doesn't work, I'll be back to square one.

Monopod bought. Monopod tried. Next stop 17-85

Do these monopods have a shutter button somewhere on the end of it? To me it would be a great gadget to shoot over a crowd, otherwise I don't think I could remain still enough while trying to balance it for a successful night shot without noise.

Hi Roxy,

That would be a great idea, a shutter release on a monopod...don't know the answer to that one, but I've seen walking sticks/canes that are actually monopods. How great when the day comes that I can't walk without a cane and it will double as a monopod

Happy New Year!!!
best wishes,
travellor