Richard Martin , Jan 29, 2009; 09:20 a.m.
I have 3 lenses which cover most of what I need which are Tamron 17-50, Canon 70-200, and Canon 400. I'm very happy with all these and wouldn't think of changing at this point but I find on occasion that the 17-50 isn't long enough and carrying the 70-200 is overkill. I thought about the Canon 17-85 but the reviews aren't great. Does anyone else find themselves in this situation and what do you do?
Jack Nordine , Jan 29, 2009; 09:36 a.m.
One option would be to pick up a 60mm 2.8 or an 85mm 1.8 to take with you when you carry the Tamron. Both are sharp and relatively fast lenses, and are very light as well.
Alex Thorne 
, Jan 29, 2009; 09:43 a.m.
Richard,
For what it's worth, my experience with the 17-85 doesn't jibe with the reviews. I find it to be a very good performer compared to my 24-70L and 10-22. If I just want to bring one lens, I don't hesitate to use it.
Mike M , Jan 29, 2009; 10:04 a.m.
I love my 17-85. It has surpised me on many occasions. On the extreme wide end its not amazing but anywhere in between I find it excellent.
Mike.
Matthijs Claessen 
, Jan 29, 2009; 10:40 a.m.
Are you looking for a one lens solution in a certain focal range or would you be o.k. with adding a "midrange lens" for the in between situations?
Nathan Meador , Jan 29, 2009; 11:04 a.m.
what about the 1.4 extender? Would the light loss be a problem? Would it maintain AF with non-canon lenses?
B.J. Scharp , Jan 29, 2009; 11:07 a.m.
Not trying to be funny, but what about taking a few steps forwards or backwards?
Alex Thorne , Jan 29, 2009; 11:14 a.m.
B.J.
Taking a few steps forwards or backwards doesn't work if you are aiming up or across a river.
Kerry Grim 
, Jan 29, 2009; 11:18 a.m.
Can you clarify? Do you miss the range between 50mm and 70mm or do you mean, by carrying the 70-200 it becomes perhaps a lot to lug around and doesn’t help with the range you are missing?
I routinely carry the 17-40 and 70-200 2.8L (Use a 40D) if doing high school running events. If I do landscape I will carry the same lenses but also carry the 50 macro lens. So if missing that gap, I do think a 60 macro or perhaps the 50 1.8 would fill that gap. I do no think carrying the bulk of 3 zoom lenses around to cover every single mm is necessary; two zooms maximum and the rest primes. But that is my choice. Your mileage may vary.
However, there are times, such as hiking, I do not carry the 70-200 if I think the chances of using it are low as I want to reduce weight and bulk. Someday I will purchase an 85, 100, or 135 lens to carry along when I want to be a lit bit more mobile and flexible.
I think the best choice of lens combination varies with the type of shooting and each persons decision is, well, personal.
Paul Granone , Jan 29, 2009; 11:24 a.m.
A gap is fine. You do not need every focal length covered by a lens. Just move your position and use what you have. Same as we do when using a prime lens.
