Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

2 3 end

Archive 2017 · Future proof upgrade

kukulec
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Future proof upgrade

Hi All,

A few month ago I wanted to change my 550d. For my photography a full frame would be the best (portrait, landscape), but due to the limitation of my funding and the lack of proper used 6ds in my country, I bought a 80d on a very good price.

The issues: the new 18-55 STM is a weak performer, and the 24 mp APS-C sensor is very demanding. I have checked thedigitalpicture.com; not very satisfied with the other options (17-55 has very average results) even on the 20 mp sensor of the 7d mII. As I got the 50/1.8, which provided decent result on 40*60 cm print, maybe I could live with the 16-35 f/4.0. Does anyone have experience with it wide open on a 24 mp sensor?

Although it is better than the 18-55 STM, I also plan to change the 55-250 IS. I need faster aperture, faster AF and better resolution. While I could use sometimes 2.8, I think the 70-200 f/4.0 IS would be sufficient for me. It also seems to be sharper than the 2.8 IS II according to this test. Now, I also read the rumors about the update this year of the 70-200 f/4.0 IS. Should I wait for it, or the price jump would be unproportional to the increase of performance?

Your thoughts would be much appreciated.

Edited on Feb 06, 2017 at 10:10 PM · View previous versions

Feb 06, 2017 at 10:05 PM

whumber
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Future proof upgrade

Take a look at the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 and the 50-100 f/1.8 if you're going to stick with Canon APS-C.

Feb 06, 2017 at 10:10 PM

kukulec
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Future proof upgrade

Checked them. The 50-100 is very nice optically, but not long enough, the 18-35 is not good enough apart of 18 mm, where it is truly great.

Feb 06, 2017 at 10:14 PM

whumber
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Future proof upgrade

kukulec wrote:
... the 18-35 is not good enough apart of 18 mm, where it is truly great.

I'm curious, what makes you say this? Most reviews have the lens pretty much uniformly excellent across the range.

Feb 07, 2017 at 08:53 AM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Future proof upgrade

Any lens should give better resolution on a sharper sensor than on a less sharp one. I would expect to be able to make good prints from the 18-55 STM, unless it is just really bad or something. I suppose I had a copy of the 18-55 IS that didn't seem that great, though.

Have you tried the lens, focusing on live view at f/8, to eliminate focus issues as a problem?

Testing for focus shift is a great idea, as well

Feb 07, 2017 at 09:02 AM

kukulec
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Future proof upgrade

"I'm curious, what makes you say this? Most reviews have the lens pretty much uniformly excellent across the range." Here.

Feb 07, 2017 at 02:39 PM

kukulec
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Future proof upgrade

AmbientMike wrote:
Any lens should give better resolution on a sharper sensor than on a less sharp one. I would expect to be able to make good prints from the 18-55 STM, unless it is just really bad or something. I suppose I had a copy of the 18-55 IS that didn't seem that great, though.

Have you tried the lens, focusing on live view at f/8, to eliminate focus issues as a problem?

Testing for focus shift is a great idea, as well

I regulary do nightscapes with Manfrotto xprob 055, live view, f/8, switched off IS naturally. The result is below my standards. The 550d+18-55 IS combo worked much better together.

Feb 07, 2017 at 02:43 PM

whumber
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Future proof upgrade

kukulec wrote:
"I'm curious, what makes you say this? Most reviews have the lens pretty much uniformly excellent across the range." Here.

I posted the same thing in my reply, you must be seeing something that I'm not because they look very close at either end to me.

Feb 07, 2017 at 03:32 PM

howard
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Future proof upgrade

Is the 17-55 (I suppose you meant the f/2.8 version as there is only one) really average? I thought it's the best EF-S performer?

Feb 07, 2017 at 03:32 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Future proof upgrade

kukulec wrote:
I regulary do nightscapes with Manfrotto xprob 055, live view, f/8, switched off IS naturally. The result is below my standards. The 550d+18-55 IS combo worked much better together.

I would recommend testing for focus shift next.

The 18-55 IS had excellent sharpness on the photozone test. Do you still have that lens? Mine was OK, but some apparently were really good

Feb 07, 2017 at 04:20 PM

Spikey131
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Future proof upgrade

This is from TDP:

"The Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens, with a fast, fixed f/2.8 aperture, very high image quality, 3-stop Image Stabilization and a very popular focal length range, is one of the best general purpose lenses available."

I would assume this means above average.

Feb 07, 2017 at 04:20 PM

jasonpatrick
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Future proof upgrade

I think you were on the right track with going for a full frame camera. You mention funds being the reason you decided to go with a crop, but the difference between a really good priced 80D and a 6D isn't all that significant. The amount you're considering spending on lens upgrades dwarfs the camera body difference.

kukulec wrote:
Hi All,

A few month ago I wanted to change my 550d. For my photography a full frame would be the best (portrait, landscape), but due to the limitation of my funding and the lack of proper used 6ds in my country, I bought a 80d on a very good price.

The issues: the new 18-55 STM is a weak performer, and the 24 mp APS-C sensor is very demanding. I have checked thedigitalpicture.com; not very satisfied with the other options (17-55 has very average results) even on the 20 mp sensor of the 7d mII. As I got the 50/1.8,...Show more →

Feb 07, 2017 at 04:44 PM

kukulec
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Future proof upgrade

AmbientMike wrote:
I would recommend testing for focus shift next.

The 18-55 IS had excellent sharpness on the photozone test. Do you still have that lens? Mine was OK, but some apparently were really good

I was so stupid to sell that lens, mine was so sharp at 5.6, that when I downloaded pictures (RAW) with the 17-55 f/2.8 IS, at the same aperture on the wide end it was sharper. However the front lens rotated, and I use BW ND1000 filter.

Feb 07, 2017 at 05:34 PM

kukulec
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Future proof upgrade

whumber wrote:
I posted the same thing in my reply, you must be seeing something that I'm not because they look very close at either end to me.

If I can find a place to try one, I will check it.

Feb 07, 2017 at 05:36 PM

kukulec
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Future proof upgrade

howard wrote:
Is the 17-55 (I suppose you meant the f/2.8 version as there is only one) really average? I thought it's the best EF-S performer?

Check RAW pictures. At 2.8 it is not that sharp, and it is prone to flare. link

Feb 07, 2017 at 05:41 PM

kukulec
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Future proof upgrade

Spikey131 wrote:
This is from TDP:

"The Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens, with a fast, fixed f/2.8 aperture, very high image quality, 3-stop Image Stabilization and a very popular focal length range, is one of the best general purpose lenses available."

I would assume this means above average.

I assumed too, and previously I was thinking to get one instead of camera upgrade. Then I downloaded RAW files, which were not convincing. It was created in an era of 10 mp, and at that time it was the best, but I don't think it would perform nicely on 24 mp, and certainly not as a 830 dollar lens should. I could try the 15-85, a totally different lens. That had good sharpness on the wide end, the tele was so-so.

Feb 07, 2017 at 05:55 PM

whumber
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Future proof upgrade

kukulec wrote:
Check RAW pictures. At 2.8 it is not that sharp, and it is prone to flare. link

Brian's copy of the 17-55 is definitely not fantastic. That lens has really shoddy build quality though, if you can find a good one, they're quite excellent. I went through 3 different copies back when I shot APS-C Canon before I found one I was happy with. When I later upgraded to FF, I found that my 17-55 was just as sharp, or slightly sharper than my 24-70ii (can't remember if I posted the comparison here or on another forum though), although obviously the 17-55 only covers APS-C. That's one lens that Canon really needs to upgrade, although if I was going to shoot APS-C these days I'd go for an X-T2 with the 16-55 as that lens is really spectacular and has excellent build quality with weather sealing.

Feb 07, 2017 at 05:56 PM

whumber
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Future proof upgrade

kukulec wrote:
If I can find a place to try one, I will check it.

That's always the rub, isn't it. =/ I'm not sure how the QC is on that particular lens either.

Feb 07, 2017 at 05:59 PM

kukulec
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Future proof upgrade

jasonpatrick wrote:
I think you were on the right track with going for a full frame camera. You mention funds being the reason you decided to go with a crop, but the difference between a really good priced 80D and a 6D isn't all that significant. The amount you're considering spending on lens upgrades dwarfs the camera body difference.

Only on the camera, there was a 500 dollar difference (with my possibilities to buy). And then I should have bought lenses. Like this, I got time to get money and buy really good optics. Just now I became sad, I stopped taking pictures, as I am not satisfied with the results. It is also important, that I like to print, I am not the one who resizes the pictures to 1920*1080, where everything seems to be perfect. On a proper 40*60 cm picture, you will be able to tell the difference. The pictures of 18-55 STM need very high sharpness values in ACR.

I think on full frame I would be a 24-70 f/4.0 IS guy.

Feb 07, 2017 at 06:08 PM

Jeff Nolten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Future proof upgrade

Brian's tests using the 60D are all very soft compared to the same tests using the 7D2. The Sigma test is only available using the 60D which might be the issue. At least the referenced 17-55 test is using the 7D2. I have no opinion on either lens.

I think the lack of a high quality normal range EF-S zoom is the weak part of Canon's APS-C offering. I use a 15-85 USM which is slow (3.5-5.6) but decent optically. I haven't tried any of the 3rd party offerings. I used a 17-40 on my 10D but then moved to a 5D. I've only really used crops for reach until recently with my 70 and now 80D where the 15-85 has gotten more use. If you find a good solution, please post.

Another option is to use primes. The Canon 24 f2.8 IS and 35 f2 IS work well, there is also an EF-S 24 f2.8 STM. The EF-S 10-18 and 55-250 STMs are pretty good. And for the longer range theres the 70-200 f4 and 100-400 Ls, not cheap.

Feb 07, 2017 at 06:13 PM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.