First lens choice for Canon 40D?

[Gizmo!]

OK, I'm just about to buy my first D-SLR. I had a film SLR a while back, so I do know (a bit) what I'm doing. I'm avoiding the budget models for various reasons, and I like the 40D more than the Nikon D90.

Problem is - what lens do I get for 'everyday' use, until I pick up a proper telephoto?
18-55 IS USM - narrow range and crap quality
17-85 IS USM - decent range, but reviews says it has awful distortion at the short end
28-135 IS USM - great range, but once the crop factor comes into consideration is 28mm a bit narrow-angle for indoor use?
18-200 Tamron/Sigma/Canon... great range, but variable reviews

Help me out here?

[ThatPhilBrettGuy]

I had the 28-135IS on my 10D (with the same crop) for over a year. Yes, if you're trying to take pictures of rooms 28mm isn't really wide enough but for most other tasks it's great.

[Gizmo!]

I'm leaning towards that one if I'm honest. Can always pick up a 10-22mm or something for macro once I've got used to the camera...

[ThatPhilBrettGuy]

Gizmo! said:

I'm leaning towards that one if I'm honest. Can always pick up a 10-22mm or something for macro once I've got used to the camera...

I got a Sigma 15-30mm after the 28-135IS, but I still don't use it much. It was really bought as we sold our last house ourselves and we wanted to get some full(ish) room shots.

[SamHH]

I would find not being able to go wider than 28mm very annoying. I have the non-IS EF 18-55mm lens and don't find the image quality to be a problem. It doesn't feel very solid if that's a problem. Given how cheap it is (I got mine for £30 inc. P&P second hand) it's worth trying. If the image quality is a major problem to you, then you can buy a better lens and hardly have lost anything. If it is not a problem, then you can identify something to buy that would be better value to you.

[LukeBird]

Agree with the post by Sam above me.
I have both the 18-55 non-IS and 28-135IS for my 40D as well.
Both cracking lenses, the 28-135 because it's a quality lens and the 18-55 for it's with and value for money...
The 18-55 isn't as sharp as the 28-135, but it isn't bad.
The 28-135 I have found utterly brilliant though.
It makes the 17-85IS kit lens (IMO) a complete waste of money.

[LotusJas]

Canon 10-22 plus a 24-105L would be a great mix and probably cover 95% of your needs.

[LukeBird]

LotusJas said:

Canon 10-22 plus a 24-105L would be a great mix and probably cover 95% of your needs.

Those are exactly what I want!
Next on the shopping list will be a 70-200 F4 though, I think!

[RobDickinson]

Gizmo! said:

OK, I'm just about to buy my first D-SLR. I had a film SLR a while back, so I do know (a bit) what I'm doing. I'm avoiding the budget models for various reasons, and I like the 40D more than the Nikon D90.

Problem is - what lens do I get for 'everyday' use, until I pick up a proper telephoto?
18-55 IS USM - narrow range and crap quality
17-85 IS USM - decent range, but reviews says it has awful distortion at the short end
28-135 IS USM - great range, but once the crop factor comes into consideration is 28mm a bit narrow-angle for indoor use?
18-200 Tamron/Sigma/Canon... great range, but variable reviews

Help me out here?

The new kit lens , 18-55IS is NOT crap quality. Its opticaly better than the 17-85 and IMO as good as the 17-40L on a crop body. Its cheap and the right range. Well worth using to get to grips with your first dSLR. Its not fast and not USM is all.

17-85 IMO is overpriced junk.

28-135 is the same lens as above but FF version, IMo the wrong range.

18-200's are huge compromises and should be left for 1 lens to take on holiday times.


Get the IS kit lens.

[Gizmo!]

LotusJas said:

Canon 10-22 plus a 24-105L would be a great mix and probably cover 95% of your needs.

Sadly the 24-105L, at £700 odd, is a teeny bit more than I wanted to spend!

I've gone for the 28-135. If it turns out not to suit I can always flog it and get something else...