EOS 20D w/ EF-S 17-85 IS USM

randy

This is my first post in this forum. I have found a lot of good information here, but not just what I am looking for.

I am ready to order a Canon 20D. Although there is not unanimous agreement on the value of the EF-S 17-85 lens, I think it looks like a good mid-length option. I know that Canon sells the 20D in a kit with the 17-85, but I cannot find ANYONE who has the kit in stock, and most sites do not even offer it for backorder.

Two questions:

1) Has anyone seen the 17-85 kit available?

2) I have a Sigma 12-24 and Canon 70-200 2.8L IS. Would anyone strongly advise bridging the gap with a Canon 24-70 2.8L instead of the EF-S kit lens? I know there is a significant difference in quality, but I am a little concerned about the frequent need for lens changes if I do not have any focal length overlap with my mid-range lens. I will be shooting primarily landscape and nature.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Andy

a no brainer
get the 24-70, in lieu of the 17-85. the 24-70 will work with any body, so it's an investmetn for the future. it's great glass, too. f/2.8 combined with the superb performance of the 20d at iso 800 or 1600 if need be, and you'll be fine in the majority of lighting situations where you might find yourself using the 17-85.

i've seen some ca in early samples of the 17-85 lens, and some softness at the wide end.

randy wrote:

This is my first post in this forum. I have found a lot of good information here, but not just what I am looking for.

I am ready to order a Canon 20D. Although there is not unanimous agreement on the value of the EF-S 17-85 lens, I think it looks like a good mid-length option. I know that Canon sells the 20D in a kit with the 17-85, but I cannot find ANYONE who has the kit in stock, and most sites do not even offer it for backorder.

Two questions:

1) Has anyone seen the 17-85 kit available?

2) I have a Sigma 12-24 and Canon 70-200 2.8L IS. Would anyone strongly advise bridging the gap with a Canon 24-70 2.8L instead of the EF-S kit lens? I know there is a significant difference in quality, but I am a little concerned about the frequent need for lens changes if I do not have any focal length overlap with my mid-range lens. I will be shooting primarily landscape and nature.

Thanks in advance for your help.

randy

Thanks Andy. I was hoping you would respond since you just went through the search process yourself for the 20D. I have been researching for the past few hours since I posted and had come to the same conclusion about the 24-70L. I suspect that the 20D body-only will be much easier to find than the EF-S 17-85 kit.I will give Tallyn's a look tomorrow based on your recommendation (although from their web site it looks like they are out of stock).

cmr164

randy wrote:

Thanks Andy. I was hoping you would respond since you just went through the search process yourself for the 20D. I have been researching for the past few hours since I posted and had come to the same conclusion about the 24-70L. I suspect that the 20D body-only will be much easier to find than the EF-S 17-85 kit.I will give Tallyn's a look tomorrow based on your recommendation (although from their web site it looks like they are out of stock).

Camera's Inc in Somerville MA has the 20D kit with 17-85 in stock. I held it today and was very impressed for the price. The L glass is definitely the better investment for the future but there is a very real increase in $$$ when you consider that to cover the 18-85 range is more than just the 24-70L.

I have the 17-35L 24-70L 70-200L and for a day or so more the 85 1.2L

My next sale might be the 17-35L with the idea of getting the 14mm. Of course that is after I decide between the 400 f4 DO and the 500 f4 L

Contact Dave Fox at Cameras Inc
267 Elm st. Somerville, MA 02144
617-666-2700

Mention my name.

randy

cmr164,

Sounds like a nice collection of lens' and getting better. Is the lack of overlap between your 24-70 and 70-200 a concern for you? Do you find that one lens gets used significantly more than the rest?

cmr164

randy wrote:

cmr164,

Sounds like a nice collection of lens' and getting better. Is the lack of overlap between your 24-70 and 70-200 a concern for you? Do you find that one lens gets used significantly more than the rest?

the lack of overlap is not an issue at all. As to which lens gets the most use...that has varied over time.

When I bought my first Canon mount dslr, I had a 28-105 consumer lens so I bought the 100-400L. Then I sold off all my consumer glass (including the 28-105) and bought the 17-35L. Those 2 lenses were all I carried and gap between 35-100 did not bother me. My next purchase was the 85 1.2L probably the 100-400 was my most used lens in those years. Then I bought the 28-70L (later sold) and while I used it I was still mostly using the 17-35 / 100-400 combo the most although the 28-70 was getting used. I had to sell the 28-70L earlier this year. Then finances improved considerably and I bought the 1DMII, the 24-70L and the 70-200L. That changed the dynamics a lot. The combination of the 1.3 factor (down from 1.6) and the difference between 28mm and 24mm has made the 24-70L my most used lens.

Note: 28-70 *1.6 factor == 45-112
While 24-70 *1.3 factor == 31-91

The increase from the DCS520 2.1MP to the MarkII 8.2MP means that the 70-200 actually gives as good as the 100-400 did on the DCS. So in a lot of places where the 100-400 was my choice the 70-200 has taken its place including at night when the generation III image stabilizer and the f2.8 is wickedly better than the f4-5.6 and 2 stop IS of the 100-400.

At the end of this generation of gear changes I will probably have:

14mm f2.8L

24-70 f2.8L

70-200 IS f2.8L

400 f4 DO IS L (or maybe the 500 IS f4L)

Hopefully that will keep me stable for a few years