First lenses for 30D

I've been saving up to get a D200 (yeah, yeah) for 6 months and after thinking

about it reaaaally hard I've decided to get a 30D instead (mostly for the lack

of noise which will permit to take some better dusk/dawn/night shots). I think

it will be plenty enough camera and the money I'm saving will permit me to get

my camera now instead of in another 6 months.

 

Now, I have roughtly 900$ Canadian to buy lenses to get me started and I need

recommendations on how to spend it. Please look at my portfolio before making

any suggestions. I've read countless reviews, forum threads, etc. and I have a

good understanding of what we're talking about. What I need is for experienced

photographers to look at what I shoot and tell me what lenses will benefit my

style of photography most for the next 6 months while I save up to get the next

lense.

 

The lenses I've narrowed it down to are the following and I'll quote rougly the

price in CA $.

 

50 f1.8 (100$)

70-200 f4 L (800$)

70-300 70-300 f4-5.6 IS (800$)

100 f2.8 Macro (800$)

17-40 f4 L (900$)

 

So the dilemma is either I get the 17-40 and I'm done shopping, OR I get the 50

+ one of the tele lenses or the macro lense.

 

That's why it's so important to look at my pictures to map out the right

lenses. If you reccomend one or the other 70-x00, please say why with regard to

my pictuers. If you want to recommend other lenses, by all means let me know

what I really need and explain why!

 

Many, many thanks because I know how hard it is to make good recommendations.

If money weren't an issue, I wouldn't even consider these lenses and would just

to the top EF-S and L lenses but hey, that's not the case!

for me the first one on the list would be the 50 f1.8 - yes it a cheap and cheerful, but at least on my copy the image quality is superb - that would cover your flower shots. try looking at some of the lenses from third party manufacturers such as sigma or tamron. the offer great quality and slightly more reasonable prices. personally i wouldn't go for the ef-s lenses as you may eventually want to change from the 30D to what may be a full frame camera, which they won't fit.

Philippe, if you're very serious about your photography, then stay clear of any and all EF-S lenses....you may not realize it, but a future full frame is coming your way in a few years, and perhaps under $2,000.

 

Assuming you're a fanatic like me, then I would only buy L zooms. Non-L Canon and all the third party offerings are not up to par.

 

I would get some wide, normal, and tele primes as well to get you the speed you'll need, eventhough today you may think you don't.

 

Build your kit slowly. Get into delayed gratification. Better to build the highest quality stable of lenses slowly then to get the BS glass tomorrow and in high quantity.

 

Your DSLR bodies will come and go, but it is your stable of lenses that you'll have for decades, so place most of your money on glass, and if you have to skimp, then go cheap on the bodies.

 

Ideally, get all L glass, but also know that Canon makes very respectable non-L primes that you should not neglect to try. As for zooms, stay clear of all non-L zooms.

 

Now if you're not a photo nut, then ignore most of my advise ;-)

You'll have to consider your own photographic preferences, but for my part I'd feel pretty

constrained if I only had 50mm and longer on a crop sensor camera.

 

I have the 17-40mm and it probably my most-used lens since it goes from decently wide

to very slightly long. The 50mm is just a bit longer (equivalent to 80mm full frame) and

the larger aperture will be useful in some circumstances.

 

If your shortest lens is 50mm this would be equivalent to having a shortest lens on a full

frame or 35 mm body be 80 mm. This would not be right for most photographers.

 

Unless you are going to only shoot long lenses, I recommend starting with the 17-40mm

and trying to find a few extra $ (less than $100 from many vendors) for the 50mm f/1.8 at

least.

<p>I have no clue what the prices are in Canada but $800 (even Martian) seems to be excessive for 100mm f/2.8 macro. I searched the web and found that $1 (US) = $1.13 (Canadian). This means that you have about $800 (US) to spend on lenses.</p>

<p><b>Disclaimer:</b> I do not own any of the lenses I will suggest below, but I am thinking about getting some of them.</p>

<p>From your pictures it looks like you need a wide angle lens (for landscapes & street photos) and a macro lens for flowers & insects. Therefore I would suggest that you get 100mm f/2.8 macro ($480 - $40(rebates if applicable - expires soon)) and either 24mm f/2.8 ($289) or 35mm f/2.0 ($230). You might have enough money left for the 50mm f/1.8 prime ($80). I do not think you have enough money for 17-40mm zoom (more versatile than primes and probably IQ not worse. The fact that it is slower than primes should not matter for landscapes assuming you have a tripod).</p>

<p>All prices are from <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/">B&H PhotoVideo</a> and do not include shipping and customs taxes. They also ship to Canada but I do not know anything about taxes. You might want to give them a call - they must know everything about it.</p>

<p>Good Luck!</p>

I agree with Dan.

 

I happen to use the 17-40mm most of the time. It's excellent quality glass that you'll always hang onto. It's wide enough and slightly long as well. The re-sale value on this lens is high too.

 

The 50 f1.8 is a superb lens that you can save up for rather quickly. Great for portraits.

 

Iﾒd pick these two lenses up first then tackle the long range later.

 

It also fits my shooting style.

 

Enjoy

Hi Philippe, I have the 70-200 F4L. This is the lens that sleeps on my camera(Rebel XT). I will be getting the 17-40 but my style of shooting really needs the 70-200. I even have the canon 100-300 but I never use it. I'd rather have less reach (70-200) but with stellar picture quality.

The focusing speed is lightning fast. I just can't say enough positive things about it.

 

Carl

If what you really want is the D200, then you should get the D200. You can send it back if you don't like its performance regarding noise. You will regret and/or revisit the decision later if you don't.

 

Michael J Hoffman

Just a thought:

 

Get the 50 - no brainer if you ask me.

 

Get a cheap wide angle prime. (eg. Sigma 28mm 1.8)

 

Get the 70-200 F4.

 

I love my 17-40. If i only had about $900CAD to buy lenses with i would spend the extra $100-$200 to get the above three lenses.

 

Having just the 70-200 and 50 is not an option in my opinion, you wont have anything in the 50mm equivelent range, never mind wide angle.

 

Use those three lenses, save your pennies for the 17-40.

 

And just to be even more difficult - Buy a Rebel XT, grip (official or Opteka), the 17-40, 70-200 and 50. (Thats what i did and I am thrilled with my purchase)

If you still have a Canon 35mm film camera, try to buy lenses that might fit both cameras without overlapping. I mean don't buy a 24-105 3.5/4.5 and then buy 28-135 f4. That would be a total waste of money. Like Dan said think of the future. A full frame digital might be coming out in the next couple of years for under 2 grand, or you might decide to jump to the 5D by then.

Philippe,

 

1. Ask yourself: What type of photography you would do the most often? Is it landscape, portrait, photojournalism style, etc. Based on this, the answer would be a bit clearer.

 

2. (a) If you do landscape, try to get the lens(es) with a range from wide to medium tele, e.g., 24-200mm. I am thinking about the 24-70mm f/2.8L and 70-200m f/4L (or 70-200mm f/2.8L.) These lenses are fit for photojournalist style too. (b) Get one lens 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L. This lens is purely for landscape. It's convenient because it's only one lens, and you don't have to change them often. So, beside the fact that you don't have to carry many lenses (and bodies), you don't have to deal often with cleaning your camera sensor.

 

2. If you do portrait more often, then the 50mm f/1.8 and 70-200mm f/4L would do.

 

Similar to one of the post above, I think you should get the highest quality lens, i.e., the L lenses, if you are serious about photography. Body goes, lens stays. So build your arsenal slowly, but with highest quality. Few but riped!

 

I hope this helps.

Your gallery has an array of flower and insect photos. I, too, enjoy macro a lot. When moving to the Canon system (from Minolta AF) about 2 years ago, I strongly considered getting the 10D and the 100/2.8 USM Macro. Instead, I went with the 35/2 and 50/2.5 macro. I still own and use these two lenses, but I did eventually end up with the 100/2.8 USM. Now with hindsight to guide, for my uses, I would have been quite satisfied with only the macro and the 10D to start.

 

If you think your style will suffer with only one prime focal length lens (and you're the only one who can answer this question), then you won't be disappointed in either of the L-zooms. The 17-40/4 is a very nice lens that will get you reasonably wide, but compared to the macro, it won't get you the nice close-up "garden" photos like you have in your gallery. The 70-200/4 is also a great lens if you prefer a telephoto zoom.

 

--tom

Thanks to all of you for taking the time to answer, it's much appreciated and your explanations really did help. In the end I was still very torn between the choices because I do like to take different types of pictures, not just macro or lanscape.

 

So, since every one seems to agree that I'm on the right track with the choices I proposed (quality lenses, EF only to be ready for full frame later)...

 

I've asked for a price quote on the 30D with the 50 f1.8 as well as a Tamron 90 f2.8 Di SP Af Macro. Every one seems to agree it's a great macro lense, great value for the money. It's summer and I really like working up close so might as well start with that and as the weather gets worse in the fall look to buy my next lense.

 

I'll then go with either the 17-40 f4L or 70-200 f4L, depending on what I want most at that point and then get the other to complete my basic setup. By this time next year I should have all of them and be dreaming of other great lenses!

 

Thanks again and I'll post my first pictures when I get the camera.