what selection of lenses for EOS 7D

<p>Hi - I have just upgraded to an EOS 7D from an EOS 30D in the hope that I can take my photography to the next level. I have bought the body only and would like to buy a 'set' of lenses to enable to get the best from this camera. <br /> As with most people, the budget to do this is limited, and they may not be all bought at once because of this.<br /> I would like to improve the quality of my landscape images, experiment with video, and have the ability to take nice portraits with good bokeh. So what do I buy to achieve this ?<br /> Initial thoughts have centred around a reasonable quality wide angle lens for some of the landscape stuff I do, a fast standard prime for portrait (and video) and a good quality general / walk around to fill the gaps and when I travel (which isn't often enough but I remain optimistic !)<br /> Having looked at many reviews etc - I came up with a possible list of :<br /> - 10-22 mm ultra wide eg. <a href="http://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/canon-ef-s-10-22mm-f35-45-usm-269-p.asp">Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM</a> (around £500)<br /> - 50mm standard prime 1.8 / 1.4 eg. Canon ef 50mm f 1.8 ii (around £80)<br /> - 24-105mm f4 eg. Canon 24-105mm f4 L series (around £650)<br /> I would be grateful for any advice or thoughts on this 'list' and comments on the possible lenses, from any EOS 7D users or photographers familiar with these lenses? Thanks ......</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Ray - all of these are good choices for a variety of reasons - but mostly that they all will provide consistently good results once you get to know them. We have all three used on a 50D and a Rebel Xti. The 24-105 is especially appreciated in our home, and we argue over possession of that one constantly. One question - did you not keep any of the lenses you had for the 30D?</p>

<p>If it is affordable I would consider a 70-200mm, just because any of the versions of this are such high quality and you'll find the bokeh is really very nice, which will be a challenge with the other choices you have because none of them are really long enough to have very flat DOF. The 10-22 is especially un-bokeh related, unless you get up very close to something and then you'll end up with some interesting distortion especially at the 10mm end. Having said that, I use it a lot for landscapes and find it to be very consistent and reliable.</p>

 

<p>That seems to be a great set of lenses.</p>

<p>Both the primes aren't great wide open but they are usable, certainly for video. I use my 1.4 at f2.0 (or narrower) for stills and those look great.</p>

<p>You do have me wondering what you used for your 30D and whether those lenses won't dor for the 7D as well.</p>

<p>All the best,</p>

<p>Matthijs.</p>

<p>Hi Ray,<br>

A couple of questions that comes to mind are, . . . what lenses did you have with your 30D? . . . what shortfalls did those lenses have?</p>

<p>I'm not familiar with either the 10-22 or the 24-105. However, I do have both the EF 50mm f/1.8 and the 1.4.<br>

The 50mm f/1.4 is claimed to have a bit better bokeh, but at considerable cost over the f/1.8. If I had it to do over again, . . . for image quality . . . I'd probably just stick with the EF 50mm f/1.8. But I do like the build quality of the EF 50 f/1.4 and the Full Time Manual Focusing ability.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p> "a good quality general / walk around to fill the gaps"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Although you don't have it listed, you might want to do some research on the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. This lens can be had with or without VC (Tamron's designation for Image Stabilization). I don't do Video, but I think this lens even has some decent reviews in that genre of photography.<br>

Best wishes,<br>

Jim j.</p>

<p>The 7D is an excellent camera, and your proposed lenses are well suited to your photographic priorities. The 85/1.8 will isolate your portrait subjects a little more than the 50, but it may not be worth the extra money to you. The 17-40 is a very good lens; while less dramatically wide than the 10-22 (and perhaps not wide enough for your landscape photos), you will also be able to use it on a full-frame camera, should you one day decide to get one. The 24-105 is also excellent and, since you didn't mention any interest in wildlife, probably more useful to you than a version of the 70-200.</p>

<p>Among other bodies I have a 7D and here are two things you should consider when you buy lenses.<br>

1 Will you ever need to move to full frame? (if this is likely then you may want to focus on EF-S lenses<br>

2 How do you prioritize the subjects do you shoot? (i.e. how to allocate your money)<br>

In terms of candidate lenses I would suggest a "standard" zoom - the Canon candidates are EF 17-40 and EF 16-35 F2.8 II or EF-S 17-55 F2.8 or 17-85 F4 - 5.6. I personally use the 16-35 but that is an expensive lens I bought for full frame use. I have not use the 17-55 but it gets good reviews.<br>

For wide angle your choices are limited to the 10-22 but I have seen good results from the Tokina 11-16 F2.8<br>

I would get the standard zoom and shoot a few portraits with it before you buy a portrait lens. The 50 f1.8 is a bargain so you might just buy this. I use the 50 f1.4 but this lens is soft wide open - really gets good at F2. The build quality is better than the 50 F1.8 and it has USM so you can manually adjust focus without taking the lens off AF. In either case you should budget for the lens hood. I would also suggest that you consider the 100 Macro (L or non L) and 85 F1.8 for portraits. They are a bit long on the APS-C bodies for indoor use but they are both great lenses. I personally use the L version of the 100 macro and this is a very versatile lens and will allow you to shoot macro. The 85 F1.8 is probably one of the best bargains in the canon range (the 50 F1.8 is the other) as it is a very sharp lens and has good fast AF.<br>

I would personally not suggest the 24-105. This is not because of any issues with the lens - just due to focal length.I shoot the 24-70 quite a lot on full frame but rarely put it on my 7D. The reason for this is that it has the equivalent range of 38.5 - 168 which is not very useful. As a standard zoom you really need something wider than 38mm equivalent.</p>

<p>You should very seriously consider the 15-85mm lens. It has superb image quality and its focal range is equivalent to 24-136mm on the 7D. I also have the 24-105 but prefer to use the 15-85. Its IS is also a later iteration and is quieter than the 24-105. This is really a very nice lens. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I would like to improve the quality of my landscape images, experiment with video, and have the ability to take nice portraits with good bokeh. So what do I buy to achieve this ?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>None of your proposed lenses are ideal for what you want to shoot. </p>

<p>The 10-22 is a bit too wide for any kind of effective portraiture, and lacks IS (not important for stills at that FL, but something very important to video).<br>

The 50/1.8 is too long for anything other than portraiture, and it's noisy AF will be audible in your video if you try to focus during shooting (and it doesn't have FTM focus)., and again, No IS (For video). <br>

The 24-105 is a pretty good choice, except that it is a slow zoom lens (used on the crop) so your portrait bokeh will be somewhat limited, also, the eff ~38mm FOV (24*1.6) will be somewhat limiting for landscapes.</p>

<p>I would suggest the EF-S 17-55/2.8 USM IS, the Sigma 17-50/2.8 HSM OS, or the EF-S 15-85/3.5-5.6 USM IS. All three will give you wide enough FL for most landscape work, 2 of the 3 have fixed max apertures (f2.8) to give you finer control of DOF for portraiture, and all three have silent AF w/ FTM, and IS( or OS) to make handheld video more practical. </p>

<p>I have a 7D and the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/4 IS. They suit my needs and all my camera gear fits in one Lowepro bag for travel. </p>

<p>Canon EFS 15-85</p>

<p>If I was committing to a dual purpose kit (stills/video) and specifically crop sensor (eg. 7D) and not getting wrapped around the axle thinking of FF too I would buy the following generally in this order:</p>

<p>1.) 17-50 f2.8 (Canon, Tamron, Sigma, etc)<br>

2.) 430 flash (eventually have 2 or more)<br>

3.) Tripod with decent ball or video head.<br>

4.) 70-200 f2.8 non-IS (Canon version)<br>

5.) Tokina 11-16 f2.8 - (Quite sure you'll like this over Canon 10-22)<br>

6.) Off camera mic or standalone audio recorder with mics<br>

7.) 24mm fast prime <br>

8.) EF-S 60mm macro<br>

------- If Really Into Video --------<br>

a.) LCD Monitor (eg Lilliput 7")<br>

b.) DSLR Rails, baseplate<br>

c.) follow focus<br>

d.) 35mm fast prime (maybe Samyang if its only for video, landscapes)<br>

e.) 85mm fast prime (Canon f1.8 or Samyang f1.4)</p>

<p>The first 6 items won't be cheap (~US$2600) but you'll have an awesome all around kit for stills and enough to produce some great video. <br>

After that I would have spent all my money on that 24LII. I shot a 35L on a 40D and it was awesome for portrait shots, etc but the 24mm would have been even better on the crop camera! I believe a 24L would be on your camera over 50% of the time. If you were to only rent one lens before buying, rent this one and try it for a week. It really sucks that it costs so much. There is now a Samyang manual focus version of this lens. Perhaps that would be an option if it turns out to be as good as their 35mm and 85mm offerings. This would be especially true if you like 24mm for video work where auto aperture and auto focus are totally irrelevant.<br>

Don't underestimate good sound. Either get a good mic or a off board recorder. If you do get into video it really does matter that much and $200 spent wisely here or there on audio will do more for your final video than any lens will ever do. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Ray,</p>

<p>I upgraded to 7D 1.5yrs ago, here is what I have.<br>

Canon 10-22, love this lens, great for architectural and landscape work, occasional group shots in tight spaces<br>

Canon 24-105 4L very sharp, IS, my walkaround lens<br>

Canon 70-200/2.8L IS II, it's my sports lens, by itself for Bball and VBall, with 2.0X III extender for soccer, 1.4X II extender for tennis<br>

I've also got the 50 1.8 and 85 1.8 for special situations, but rarely use them.</p>

<p>I suggest you prowl Ebay for someone's first generation 70-200/2.8L IS....many are upgrading to the II and selling the I on ebay. I would also check out lensrentals.com, they sell their stuff, usually in very good condition, after they've had it a while.</p>

<p>Let me echo a few of the other respondents who like the 17-55/2.8L IS.<br>

I gave this lens to my daughter, to get her started with her xTi3....and I've borrowed it back numerous times. Sharp, fast, and good bokeh.</p>

<p>My extensively used  lens  is EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 that gives me very good results on 500D! Sure this performance would be much improved on 7D Which I don't have 7D!</p><div></div>

This one outside!<div></div>

<p>Whatever worked on the 30D will work on the 7D. They are both APS-C sensor cameras. One thing though, the 7D out resolves the 30D by a wide margin so some good fast lenses might do it some justice. </p>

I have a 7D and all the lenses you mention except the 50 f/1.4. In addition, I also have the 100-400L and the 60mm

macro EF-S. For me, the combination is exactly what I need, so I'm inclined to agree with your choices. I think you have

all your bases covered, unless you need a wide, fast lens. If you plan on doing a lot of portraits, you may want a faster

zoom for more flexibility. And, of course, your coverage range stops at 105mm (about 160mm full frame equivalent). For

me and the subjects I like to shoot, that would be very limiting, but if it works for you then you're good to go.

<p>All these 17-55/2.8 recommendations. . . .<br>

. . the heck with that noise! Too expensive and too limiting for what you want to do. . .especially since you seem to have a large budget.</p>

<p>The 10-22/EF-S and 24-105/4L pair VERY WELL together. IS in the 10-22 range is irrelevant. The 24-105 is a great focal length, and is a great "general purpose" lens.</p>

<p>The one thing these two lenses do not do well is portraits. . .which is probably why you put the 50/1.8 on your list. Yes. . .good choice. Add the 85/1.8 to the list for a bit of flexibility. . . .and you are <em>set</em>. Oh. . and you need a flash. Buy a 430EX. :)</p>

<p>BTW: this lineup looks alot like my day kit.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>"<em>Having looked at many reviews etc - I came up with a possible list of : - 10-22 mm ultra wide eg. <a href="http://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/canon-ef-s-10-22mm-f35-45-usm-269-p.asp" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM</a> (around £500) - 50mm standard prime 1.8 / 1.4 eg. Canon ef 50mm f 1.8 ii (around £80) - 24-105mm f4 eg. Canon 24-105mm f4 L series (around £650) </em><br>

It depends on what you want to do with your camera. There are so many lenses to choose from. Do you plan to shoot studio, wildlife, nature, street, sports, or just general photography. The 24-105 is a very good general purpose lens but after the so-so reviews I was hesitant to purchase it. Another problem is that the 24mm on the short end of that lens is actually 38.5mm which is not really wide angle. You can make up for it with the 10-22mm which is a very sharp lens but for some reason mine stayed on the shelf most of the time until I finally sold it.<br>

The 50mm f 1.8 is nice plastic lens for the money, but sooner or later you might want to move to the 50mm f1.4 which is a little sturdier and almost as nice optically. For general photography my favorite lens was the 28-105mm believe it or not because I liked the range, that's why I skipped the 17-55mm Canon lens and instead opted for the 17-70mm sigma which gave me a range of 24-112mm, perfect for general purpose photography.<br>

The lens is not stellar by any means but good enough. Meaning I'm happy because it did not cost me that much($465). If I had payed as much as the 24-105 or the 17-55 cost I would have been very dissapointed. </p>

<p>Tamron 18 - 270mm. This has been my most used lens. I hardly ever use all of my other Canon lenses except for my 100 - 400mm when I'm looking for birds at a distance.</p>

 

<p>Marvni, and the quality of the photos shows this!</p>

<p>Assuming that you have no lenses at all right now?</p>

<p>I'd suggest you buy one lens at a time, rather than a bunch at once, and that the first one you buy is a mid-range focal length. Either a zoom (16-35 or 17-55 or 24-105) or, perhaps wisest of all, a $100 50mm 1.8.</p>

<p>Use that one lens for a couple months, and then ask yourself: Do I often feel like I'm too far away from my subject? Do I often feel I'm crowding my subject? Am I struggling to get enough light into the lens? Am I satisfied with the background blur of my portraits? And so forth. Let your answers determine your next purchase. If you find after a couple months that you're actually perfectly happy, then perhaps the one lens is all you need! </p>

<p>One additional comment about the notion of avoiding AFS lenses in case you one day move to full frame. I disagree. The 10-22 and 17-55 are excellent lenses, and when I owned a 7D I loved them both. When I moved to a full frame camera, I sold the 7D and these EFS lenses. The lenses held their value even better than the camera.</p>

<p>Just wanted to say thanks to all that have contributed with their advice and experience.<br />It has helped enormously. Ray </p>

<p>Ray, can you share what you decided?</p>

<p>Hi David. I have realised how hard it is to 'cover all the bases' with a limited budget. It would appear that I gave the impression that the budget was unlimited (I wish !) In reality I have a little in excess of £1000 to get myself a starter set of 2 or 3 quality lenses that I hope will complement the 7D.<br>

So after all the advice, suggestions, and info I have opted to buy :<br>

- <strong>Canon 24-105mm f4 L / £619.00 inc</strong> with 3 year warranty <br>

Hopefully this will prove to be a good all rounder / walk around lens both for stills and video<br /> Many people seem to rate it, and although the APS-C crop means that the range effectively <br /> starts at 38mm, I am hoping it will provide good results for a number of different situations.<br /> I like the constant aperture through the zoom range which I understand is important for <br /> video?<br /> <br /> - <strong>Canon 50mm f1.8 / £85.00 inc</strong><br>

This appears to be a 'no brainer', reviews and opinion seem to rate it as very good value for<br /> money. A fast lens, useful for portraiture with good bokeh, and apparently works well for video <br /> too? <br>

- The choice of ultra-wide is a little harder and I am at the moment considering 3 or 4 <br /> contenders and think they would probably all work well?<br /> <strong>Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 / £480.00 inc <br /> Sigma 10-22mm f3.5 EX DC HSM / £470.00 inc<br /> Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 AT-X 116 Pro DX / £450.00 inc</strong><br>

<strong> </strong>My research suggests that any of these would work well for me?<br /><strong> </strong>They all cost around the same money. Reviews rate the build quality well.<br /> Obviously the range is better on the first two, but the Tokina reviews speak highly of<br /> its sharpness, speed, build quality and how well it works for video<br /> I am not sure how important it is but the Sigma and Tokina are also constant aperture <br /> throughout the zoom range </p>

 

<h1> </h1>