Lenses for the Canon 350D

I have the Canon 350D with the kit lens, which is okay, but last fall I bought two new professional lenses for it. First, the 50mm f/1.2L USM fixed focal length lens, which is awesome, because it can take photos in almost no light. And next the 24-70mm f/2.8L USM, which is also awesome.



But what I’ve learned is that it works best with the full-frame cameras, like the 5D and up. For the 350D and its brethren, the 400D, 20D and 30D, the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM is likely to work better. The 17-55mm range corresponds to 27-88mm with a ful-frame body, which is roughly equivalent to what the 24-70mm will do. Also, I believe it’s smaller and lighter, which would be a bonus, because currently, the 24-70mm lens feels awkwardly bulky and heavy on top of the compact 350D body. The bottom line, at least, has been that it’s too big and heavy for me to bring along just in case. And I could really use some even wider wide-angel shots than what the 24-70mm can give me.



So I’m looking to sell my 24-70mm lens, and instead buy the 17-55mm.



Do you have any recommendations before I do? Is there another lens that I should consider instead? Anything to consider that I missed?

5 comments

My recommendation: Keep the L-glass. I would never trade an L-lens for an EF-S lens. Why? Because the quality difference is huge. There is a reason why the L-glass is heavier and bulkier. The 350D is a very light camera, so don't let the weight of the lens fool you. Ask yourself why you really need to switch lenses. If it's because you just want something that has a wider angle, then go ahead and buy yourself a superwide-angle lens. But don't throw away the 24-70. It is one of the most versatile and high-quality lenses out there - no matter what size your chip is.
  Cancel
Thanks, Rasmus, that's good to know. I do want the wider angle. What would you recommend for a wide-angle lens? Btw, I found your recent articles on microstock endlessly fascinating and useful. Thank you so much for sharing. I want to get into that. I applied to be a photographer for iStock a few days ago, anxiously waiting to hear back from them.
By Lars Pind on Mon, Jul 30, 07 at 16:54 · Reply
  Cancel
I have a "16-35mm L":http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00006I53Q/ lense and I love it. It's extremely wide (with a 5D) and still the optical quality is staggering. There is a "new version":http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-16-35mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx of the lens out now, which should be even better. Granted, you won't get that wide with 350D (but good lenses far outlive any body these days), but still wider than with the EF-S lens. Of course, the lens is neither small, light nor cheap. However, neither is the EF-S lens (they weight about the same).
By Jarkko Laine on Mon, Jul 30, 07 at 16:54 · Reply
  Cancel
I have a 10D, the old version of the the 350D, and I am very happy with the 17-40L, but I need something longer to go with it, and am considering the new 24-105 indstead of the 24-70...
By Morten Frederiksen on Mon, Jul 30, 07 at 16:54 · Reply
  Cancel
Personally, I am seriously considering the 20mm fixed lens from Canon as a wide addition to my selection. I've shot with some of the ultra wide lenses and didn't like the amount of chromatic aberration, but that is impossible to avoid completely with those lenses ...
  Cancel

Leave a comment