# Best travel lens for APS-C, Canon ?



## ahson (Mar 11, 2010)

In your opinion, which one is the best travel, all purpose lens for a Canon aps-c camera? 

The Criteria:

Quality 
Price 
Weight
Zoom Level



Thanks


----------



## TJ K (Mar 11, 2010)

Might be helpful to post exactly what you want to use it for and your price range. I might think a 300 2.8 is nice to bring around but you might not.


----------



## cfusionpm (Mar 11, 2010)

ahson said:


> In your opinion, which one is the best travel, all purpose lens for a Canon aps-c camera?
> 
> The Criteria:
> 
> ...


 
You can't pick all of them. Lenses, like most things in the world are about compromises. The first things that pop into mind though are the EF-S 18-200mm and EF-S 18-135. Both go from wide to telephoto in a pretty compact package, but suffer from some distortion and IQ issues. If you don't need to go wide, the 55-250mm would work. If you don't need to go too telephoto, a 17-85mm would work.

Since it's the newest, I would suggest looking into the 18-135mm. I have no personal experience, but I hear it's not too bad.

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens Review


----------



## matfoster (Mar 11, 2010)

ahson said:


> Quality
> Price
> Weight
> Zoom Level


 
something to consider, if you get only one opportunity to visit a place, is quality more or less important than coverage? maybe better to have average quality pictures allowing wide and long detail than just higher quality, medium-range pictures.


----------



## ahson (Mar 11, 2010)

I cannot agree more than what you all just said. There are few lenses in my mind such as Canon 18-135, 18-200. Sigma 18-200, 18-250, etc.

I looked at some reviews and samples on the Canon 18-135 & Canon 18-200, surprisingly their picture quality are very similar to my eyes. Question is do I need a lens up to 200 for travelling? The 18-135 surely is lighter and better to carry around and cheaper. Still I cannot make up my mind on which one has the upper hand.

As for other name brands like Sigma's, I have no idea are they as good as Canon's travel lens. Their price is nice but I cannot be sure about their picture quality.


Btw I had my friend's Canon 18-200 for awhile but never get a chance to try others. I couldn't compare it to any of them.


Thanks


----------



## fokker (Mar 11, 2010)

For travelling I would say wider is far more important than telephoto - shooting buildings, landmarks, architecture and landscapes are probably going to be your staples, unless you're going to africa or something and want to shoot some wildlife. Have a think about the new 15-85 IS from canon, otherwise I would say the 17-85 is a good choice - lightweight, decent IQ, can be had pretty cheap. Biggest benefit is having IS - screw lugging a tripod around with you when IS can be used down to like 1/4 second handheld at 17mm on the 17-85, and the 15-85 is supposed to be even better (also has better IQ, bigger aperture and costs more).


----------



## matseski (Mar 11, 2010)

Any thoughts on the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 as a travel lens as compared to the Canon 17-85?


----------



## ahson (Mar 11, 2010)

If for me, I don't think I want a 17-50 as my travel lens. Maybe I will not get to use 85 or 135 or even 200 but 50 seems a bit low for travelling, one lens only purpose.


----------



## fokker (Mar 11, 2010)

I'd value the extra range more than the bigger aperture. Does the tamron have IS (or VC or whatever it is they call it)? If not, then I wouldn't bother.


----------



## ahson (Mar 11, 2010)

Finally, it comes down to either Canon 18-135 & Canon 18-200. 

18-135         
455g            
$529CAD       

18-200
595g
$670CAD

Picture quality are very similar to each other

Out of these 2 lenses, which one will you pick for the travel lens?


----------



## skieur (Mar 11, 2010)

matseski said:


> Any thoughts on the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 as a travel lens as compared to the Canon 17-85?


 
The 17-50mm is great on a crop body sensor and the 17-85 is super for a full frame camera.

skieur


----------



## cfusionpm (Mar 11, 2010)

^ The 17-85 lens is an EF-S and will only mount to a crop body.


----------



## ahson (Mar 11, 2010)

No one has experience on the 18-200 & 18-135?


----------



## cfusionpm (Mar 11, 2010)

Here are reviews for both:

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens Review

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens Review

I would personally get the 18-135 for the simple reason of it being newer, but I've not personally used either.


----------



## CxThree (Mar 12, 2010)

Id go for the 18-200.  I have a friend that bought it for his 7D as a vacation lens.  He has been happy with it.  He's fairly picky too.


----------

