Recommend an upgrade from EF-S kit lens for 77D

[drmikeinpdx]

I like to use Rebel-class bodies as travel cameras. When I upgraded to the 77D I thought the extra resolution warranted some testing to determine the best lens to keep on the 77D most of the time. I like the term "walk around lens."

First I got out my ancient 18-55 kit lens and took some test shots of a resolution target. It lack of sharpness was shocking and the contrast was crappy.

Then I tried my EF-S 18-135 which was my main lens used on my T5i. It was better, but still a large step down in image quality from the L lenses I use for serious work. I didn't feel it was worthy of the new sensor.

Next I mounted up the 17-40 F/4 L. The optical quality was good, but the zoom range is pretty short for the size of the lens. Not really worth carrying around.

I tried my 24-105 F/4 L IS and it worked pretty well, but it's awfully large on the little 77D Rebel body. Not a fun walking around lens.

I've had the EF-S 17-50 F/2.8 in the past. After I got the loose zoom assembly fixed, it was quite sharp, but still big and heavy for this role. I also had the Sigma equivalent but wasn't impressed enough to keep it at the time. They were both pretty well suited to the 7D, but too big for the 77D.

So who has discovered the perfect walking around lens for the latest Rebel class bodies? They have tons of resolution, but that's only useful if you have a sharp lens.

So far, my favorite is the 24mm F/2.8 pancake lens. That's a sharp little bugger, even if it isn't stabilized.

I'm wondering if it's worth trying out the EF-S 15-85 or the EF-S 17-85. I believe I had the latter several years ago and sold it due to poor sharpness.

Am I missing any other options for a really good Rebel walk around lens? Tamron? Sigma?

 

[ahsanford]

Depends on what you value. Canon has left a gaping hole with EF-S standard zooms that have you stuck between the size/cost of the UWA EF lenses, kit plasticky STM variable max aperture EF-S zooms, or a handful of decent but imperfect EF-S USM standard zooms that seem long in the tooth or lacking speed.

If it's pure IQ in a walkaround zoom, size and cost notwithstanding: Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 or possibly the recent two 16-35L lenses. I'd skip the 17-40L in this application unless the 16-35 f/4L IS is just too big for you, as the 16-35 f/4L IS categorically poops all over the 17-40 unless it lives at f/8-f/11 on a tripod.

If it's best IQ in a lens that is not large / heavy / unbalanced on crop, I've heard decent things about the EF-S 15-85 IS USM lens, but not great things. It's still a ~ 6x zoom multiplier variable max aperture zoom, but at least it has USM, IS, and critically gets you down to 15mm (24mm FF equiv., something I deem a must on a standard zoom).

For a prime on crop, I think the call is much easier. Consider pitching that pancake -- it's sharp and small and that's it. But a 35 f/2 IS USM (or the 24/28 2.8 IS non-L lenses if you prefer) is quick, has IS, has ring USM, is mechanically override-able with a much better manual focus ring, and has a hood that you actually enjoy putting on and off, has a fairly standard filter diameter for CPL use, distance scale, etc. In short, this is where a nice full-featured EF option on the wide end becomes a lovely crop option on the standard end.

But holy hell, does Canon need something reliably 'better than kit' in crop here. A simple enough EF-S 17-55 f/4 USM would do wonders. Just a basic, sharp, constant aperture instrument that doesn't take two days to focus. Sell it for $499. But I'm guessing Canon wants you to long for an $$$ EF zoom / climb up to FF and may never release a ring USM EF-S lens again.

- A

 

[SecureGSM]

Sigma 18-35 F1.8 Art and 50-100 F1.8 Art are the 2 lenses that I would give a really long look.
both are very sharp wide open. Festive season sale is just around the corner now. with up to 20% total discount these 2 lenses may be what you are looking for.

p.s. 18-35 Art is (apparently) a parfocal lens. may come handy for videos.

Am I missing any other options for a really good Rebel walk around lens? Tamron? Sigma?

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I feel the 15-85 is a excellent all around lens, I recently bought a used one for $350. I just purchased a Signa 18-35, but its bigger and heavier and not as versatile, its more of a special purpose lens. The 16-35mm f/4 is great, but even less of a walk around lens than the 17-55.

 

[drmikeinpdx]

ahsanford: I do have the 35mm F/2 IS and have used it a couple of times on the 77D. I do like the image quality, but it's a fairly big prime lens for the small body. On the plus side, it is quite lightweight and looks cool to my eyes. My copy front focuses slightly on the 77D, which of course has no MFA option, so using it wide open can make focus accuracy an issue. I guess I could use live view if I had the time. Manual focus through the viewfinder is not an option, in my experience.

SecureGSM: Thanks for the tip. I will include those two Sigma lenses in my research. Have you heard anything good or bad about their autofocus accuracy on a Rebel class body? At F/1.8 accuracy is pretty important.

Mt. Spokane: Thanks for the report on the 15-85. I will check that out further.

Additional suggestions are welcome!

 

[Ryananthony]

SecureGSM: Thanks for the tip. I will include those two Sigma lenses in my research. Have you heard anything good or bad about their autofocus accuracy on a Rebel class body? At F/1.8 accuracy is pretty important.

Buy new, and return if there are any issues. Front/Back focusing are not issues, if you purchase the dock. Inconsistent focus is.

 

[SecureGSM]

I have owned 18-35 and used it with Canon 650D body. once properly calibrated to your camera, the lens is reasonably AF consistent (9 out of 10) wide open. 10 out of 10 in live view mode. great lens for video.
50-100 lens, in my experience at least (2 lenses calibrated to 70D and 80D bodies) is AF consistent. good lens.

note #1: none of these lenses are stabilised
note #2: each of these lenses does require accurate USB dock calibration at 4 distances to calibration target and at 4 focal lengths. 16 points in total. It is extremely important to ensure that lens auto focusing precisely at MFD and at infinity. It takes 3+ hours per each lens to calibrate properly. In my experience none of Sigma Art or Sports lenses were spot on at MFD or Infinity out of the box.

SecureGSM: Thanks for the tip. I will include those two Sigma lenses in my research. Have you heard anything good or bad about their auto focus accuracy on a Rebel class body? At F/1.8 accuracy is pretty important...

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I've heard of people having issues with autofocus consistency on the 18-135. I purchased one used a few days ago, and my SL2 died as I was testing the lens, so rather than wait, I decided to check AF with my 5D MK IV. First, I upgraded the lens firmware via the dock, then started comparing focus at 35mm at about 2.5 ft. DPAF was very good but not perfect, Manual focus was very difficult because the focus ring has a tiny amount of play, and does not have enough rotational resolution. If I used Canon Utilities where I could control focus in tiny steps electronically, I found that a change of 3 steps closer than DPAF gave came up with better contrast. PDAF resulted in a badly blurred image, about +18 was needed. I dialed it into the dock and updated the lens, and PDAF focus was then fine at 35mm and 2.5 ft. Then I stopped. I noticed a 1:1 correlation between the camera AFMA and dock setting worked.

I did not see any abnormal AF consistency so far.

Still, if you are size and weight sensitive, its not a small lens, f/1.8 means a lot of glass.

 

[ahsanford]

I've heard of people having issues with autofocus consistency on the 18-135. I purchased one used a few days ago, and my SL2 died as I was testing the lens, so rather than wait, I decided to check AF with my 5D MK IV. First, I upgraded the lens firmware via the dock, then started comparing focus at 35mm at about 2.5 ft. DPAF was very good but not perfect, Manual focus was very difficult because the focus ring has a tiny amount of play, and does not have enough rotational resolution. If I used Canon Utilities where I could control focus in tiny steps electronically, I found that a change of 3 steps closer than DPAF gave came up with better contrast. PDAF resulted in a badly blurred image, about +18 was needed. I dialed it into the dock and updated the lens, and PDAF focus was then fine at 35mm and 2.5 ft. Then I stopped. I noticed a 1:1 correlation between the camera AFMA and dock setting worked.

I did not see any abnormal AF consistency so far.

Still, if you are size and weight sensitive, its not a small lens, f/1.8 means a lot of glass.

Presume that's a typo? I've heard of the Sigma 18-35 mounting on EF, but not the EF-S 18-135 lenses!

- A

 

[Maximilian]

drmikeinpdx, I suppose you've summed up the EF-S zoom dilemma quite well in your first post.

So you'll have to live with the decision of IQ versus size with zooms or switch to primes.
The 35/2.0 IS was mentioned by ahsanford and as you think it's too big for a prime

the only other way to go is with the pancakes. That was my choice with a small travel setup.

I have a 100D/SL1. I combine it with the 24 and 40 mm pancakes and for more reach I add a 85/1.8.
This 3 lens combo fits quite well in one small bag.
Downsides are you'll have to change lenses a lot, the f/2.8 of the pancakes is so-so (but better than the zooms). And the STM AF of the pancakes is a compromise, too.
But it's small, relatively cheap and the IQ is great for that price.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I've heard of people having issues with autofocus consistency on the 18-35. I purchased one used a few days ago, and my SL2 died as I was testing the lens, so rather than wait, I decided to check AF with my 5D MK IV. First, I upgraded the lens firmware via the dock, then started comparing focus at 35mm at about 2.5 ft. DPAF was very good but not perfect, Manual focus was very difficult because the focus ring has a tiny amount of play, and does not have enough rotational resolution. If I used Canon Utilities where I could control focus in tiny steps electronically, I found that a change of 3 steps closer than DPAF gave came up with better contrast. PDAF resulted in a badly blurred image, about +18 was needed. I dialed it into the dock and updated the lens, and PDAF focus was then fine at 35mm and 2.5 ft. Then I stopped. I noticed a 1:1 correlation between the camera AFMA and dock setting worked.

I did not see any abnormal AF consistency so far.

Still, if you are size and weight sensitive, its not a small lens, f/1.8 means a lot of glass.

Presume that's a typo? I've heard of the Sigma 18-35 mounting on EF, but not the EF-S 18-135 lenses!

- A

Yes, my fingers don't work so well, and I missed seeing it. I've updated it. I use a gaming keyboard so I get better tactile feedback, but sometimes I hit multiple keys and strange things pop up. In this case, a RED 18-135.

 

[drmikeinpdx]

...the only other way to go is with the pancakes. That was my choice with a small travel setup.

I have a 100D/SL1. I combine it with the 24 and 40 mm pancakes and for more reach I add a 85/1.8.
This 3 lens combo fits quite well in one small bag.
Downsides are you'll have to change lenses a lot, the f/2.8 of the pancakes is so-so (but better than the zooms). And the STM AF of the pancakes is a compromise, too.
But it's small, relatively cheap and the IQ is great for that price.

Maximilian, that's pretty close to what I've done on a couple of trips. My basic lens that stays on the camera is the 24 pancake. Then I add either the 40 pancake or the nifty fifty and a telephoto in a messenger style bag.

For a telephoto lens, I love the EF 85mm F/1.8 (used at F/2.5) partly because it looks good and handles well on the Rebel class body. My main objection so far is that I get a lot of motion blur with it. I could use my Tamron stabilized 85, but it's a lot bigger. I probably just need to grudgingly increase the ISO enough to allow a reasonable shutter speed for my camera-holding abilities.

Speaking of telephotos, on my last trip I brought the 24 pancake and the popular plasticky EF-S 50-250 IS. My copy of that zoom is surprisingly sharp and the IS works well too. I typically use it in bright daylight, so the small aperture hasn't been a problem so far. This two lens combo fits well in my motorcycle tank bag. I close the flippy screen to protect the LCD panel and don't even use a camera case.

 

[drmikeinpdx]

I feel the 15-85 is a excellent all around lens, I recently bought a used one for $350.

Mt. Spokane, have you done any testing yet with your copy of the 15-85? I've been reading some reviews and people say that while it's pretty sharp, it has a lot of distortion and significant chromatic aberration. I'd be interested to know how standard software like Lightroom works to remove those from RAW images.

 

[Sporgon]

G1XIII

It's not a lens for your 77D, but if the new G1X continues the tradition of a really good zoom coupled with the 77D's sensor it's going to be some (big) pocketable camera.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

If you want to keep it small and light, the "18-55mm F3.5-5.6 STM" is a bargain. Focus is much faster than the pancakes and the image stabilizer is great. Stopping down 1 stop, the image is sharp from corner to corner. It may not look so perfect on an APS-C 24 megapixel camera, but no zoom lens achieves this feat when pixel peeping.

 

[drmikeinpdx]

If you want to keep it small and light, the "18-55mm F3.5-5.6 STM" is a bargain. Focus is much faster than the pancakes and the image stabilizer is great. Stopping down 1 stop, the image is sharp from corner to corner. It may not look so perfect on an APS-C 24 megapixel camera, but no zoom lens achieves this feat when pixel peeping.

My 18-55 is a really old, non-STM version that is quite unsharp even at F/8. It has been carried around a lot on various kinds of trips so maybe it's just getting old. I recall thinking that my copy worked pretty well back when it was mounted on an 8 Megapixel body so that tells you how old it is.

I like that physical size/weight and zoom range, so I should probably get my hands on a new copy and try it out.

Does anyone else like the current EF-S 18-55 STM lens?

 

[BillB]

If you want to keep it small and light, the "18-55mm F3.5-5.6 STM" is a bargain. Focus is much faster than the pancakes and the image stabilizer is great. Stopping down 1 stop, the image is sharp from corner to corner. It may not look so perfect on an APS-C 24 megapixel camera, but no zoom lens achieves this feat when pixel peeping.

My 18-55 is a really old, non-STM version that is quite unsharp even at F/8. It has been carried around a lot on various kinds of trips so maybe it's just getting old. I recall thinking that my copy worked pretty well back when it was mounted on an 8 Megapixel body so that tells you how old it is.

I like that physical size/weight and zoom range, so I should probably get my hands on a new copy and try it out.

Does anyone else like the current EF-S 18-55 STM lens?

Check the photozone review of the lens. They like it a lot

 

[Maximilian]

...
Does anyone else like the current EF-S 18-55 STM lens?

I own the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM from the kit I bought with the 100D.
I like it for it's versatility but the IQ is average. It definetly falls behind the pancakes.
But I'll take it with me from time to time when fast zooming is more important than IQ.

Please note that there is a new 18-55mm 1:4-5,6 IS STM as well.

 

[wsmith96]

Does anyone else like the current EF-S 18-55 STM lens?

I got one recently paired with a refurb 80D. Amazingly the price was the same with or without the lens, so why not get it. I keep it for my kids, but I did test it out and I was relatively pleased with it. Not a replacement for my 17-55 or 24-105, but the quality really isn't that bad at all.

 

[old-pr-pix]

I feel the 15-85 is a excellent all around lens, I recently bought a used one for $350.

+1
My copy has been excellent - no extensive testing, but it easily equals my 24-105L for crop body duty. Only annoyance is zoom creep which I suppose could be fixed but I haven't bothered. I haven't had any issues in light rain, but it isn't weather sealed.

Someone suggested the Sigma 50-100 Art... not a 'walk around' lens in my opinion. Great lens, but heavy/massive/too long FL for 'walk around' duty IMHO.