superlite17 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Hello all, I have just gone digital and am what you would probably call prosumer... I am a wanna be! I have always been a shutterbug and have finally started some formal training etc.Anyway I want to come up with three lenses that will be my "kit" for now. I love shooting everything: kids, scenics,portraits, flowers, wildlife you name it. From all the threads I have read it seems as though you cannot go wrong with the CANON EF 70-200MM F /2.8L USM LENS, that this is the Canon "must have." It is pricey so is the IS worth the extra money? Anyway thought I might try to get advice on a great setup for my 20D. Maybe if any of you have been in the same situation, what lens set you decided on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eosbob Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 The 70-200 2.8L is as good as it is made out to be. I have the non-IS version and I don't miss the IS. For the shorter side I use a 50 1.4 and am very happy with the image quality. I also have the 17-35 2.8L. The newer 16-35 2.8L is a highly regarded wide zoom, but for about half the price you could get the 17-40 f4L which is also quite highly regarded, and at that focal length the f4 is probably plenty fast enough, you need to decide. Since you have a 20D there is also a selection of EF-s lenses that I don't have any experience with, but one of them might be a good choice for the wide end of the spectrum. The rest depends on resources and preference. I have the 100 2.8 Macro, and I use it extensivly for macro and some portraiture. It overlaps the 70-200 so if you are not into macro there really isn't much need to bother. On the longer side I have a 300 2.8L IS and it is an awesome lens. It is manageable enough that I take it most everytime I venture out. The tripod collar can be removed if you are shooting hand held and for this lens I find the Image Stabilization very valuable. With a Canon 2X teleconverter it becomes a very respectable 600 5.6L IS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dk. Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Do you have lots of $$$$ of little $$$ Here's two option's no need to be greedy and get them all at once. ;o) lol (Option #1 little $$$) Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Lens Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM Lens Tamron SP AF28-75/2.8 XR Di LD Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens (Option #2 Lots of $$$$ but saving a bit on the 17-40, 300, etc) Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Lens Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro Lens Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM Lens Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens Canon EF 300mm f/4.0 L IS USM Lens DK. P.s. Both options are good but of course option #2 is better, Is "IS" worth it? Not sure but it is a nice thing to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dk. Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 I missed the part were you said 3 lenses. Here's 3 Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L Tamron SP AF28-75/2.8 XR Di LD Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM Lens Take care. DK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitmstr Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 16-35mm f/2.8L 50mm f/1.4 70-200 f/2.8L IS Those will keep you happy (and busy) for years to come, guaranteed! Cheaper but, parallel set would be: 17-40 f/4L 50 f/1.8 70-200 f/4L All excellent lenses as well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brideday Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 I too was a Nikon shooter and I would recommend the 70-200 2.8, I have the non IS, 16-35 2.8L or 17-40 4.0L and the trusty 50mm 1.8. Just my choice, Kalim www.brideday.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 i would help you but bob atkins would probably ban me for good advice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffc1 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Rod:I have both the 10D & 20D. I use my 20D more than the other. The types of lenses that you want, based on the types of photos you mentioned you want to shoot, depends on the money you want to spend and the weight/bulk you want to carry around. The 70-200mm F/2.8 is a good lens from what I hear, but I do not own that one. If you do not want to spend tons on a single lens I recommend the following lenses (just my opinion): for sharp portraits and close ups, Canon 50mm F/1.4 USM and Canon 100mm F/2.8 USM Macro; for landscapes Canon wide angle such as an 20mm F/2.8 USM; and for wildlife, Canon 100-400mm F/4.5-5.6 L USM IS, and think about getting a teleconverter for this one. A couple of things to keep in mind is the "1.6 crop factor" for this camera that applies to all compatable lenses. The 100-400mm lens I mentioned is also expensive, but the others range from approx 300-500. I own all 4 of the ones mentioned, as well as a few others, but those are the ones I use the most and I am REALLY happy with them. The IS is a great feature to have to help eliminate camera shake while holding the camera without a tripod for a little longer exposure and/or for magnifications where camera shake would be more evident. You could get all three (20mm, 50mm and 100mm Macro) for less than what you would spend on the 70-200mm, and have a little more of a variety to work with. Then, think about a more expensive lens after you've played some? Another "walk around lens" that I have and enjoy for snap shots is the Canon 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM. There's just so many to choose from, but again, it all comes down to purpose and cost for you. Have fun.Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giles_lean Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 <p> My choices: </p> <ul> <li>10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 EF-S <li>35mm f/2 <li>50mm f/1.8 <li>70-200 f/2.8 IS (plus 1.4x extender) </ul> <p> Yeah, that's four lenses, but you're not going to hold the 50mm f/1.8 against me, right? :-) </p> <p> I can't tell you if the IS for the 70-200mm is worth the extra money or not. It depends what you plan to photograph and how painful the extra cost is. My non-IS preference would be for the f/4 lens, as it's cheaper *and* lighter. But then it's slower. Too many choices! </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 1/60th at 4.5 with the built in flash...yea that could be a problem..try using a faster lens....like an f2...and lose the flash.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 wrong thread....see what a big help i am!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgpinc Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 There's probably only one person who knows what lenses work best for you. You look at him when you shave. Lenses are always a bit of trial and error process. I've owned and sold the 17-35 2.8, 28 2.8, 70-210 3.5/4.5, 100-300. Currently use the 17-40 or 20, 35, 50 macro, 85 or 100, 70-200 for both film and digital. The digital 1.6 factor adds a whole new dimension to the equation. 20mm = d 32mm, 24mm = d 38.4mm, 28mm = d 45mm, 35mm = d 56mm, 50mm = d 80mm, 85mm = d 136mm. You have to really think what that means and use it for a while to get to know what works. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_ho Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 17~40 + 50/1.4 + 70~200/4 < 70~200IS (in terms of $)(AND similar in terms of weight!) with the clean iso800, might be the reason for people to get rid of IS. Remember to buy the "right" hood for the 17~40. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fj5 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 If I were you, I'd go with: EF 17-40mm f/4L EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM EF 70-200mm f/4L This would be the not so expensive but still effective route! OH, and, of course, you have to add an EF 50mm f/1.8 (Mark I or II) - I prefer the Mark I because of the better build quality. Both of these lenses are rather inexpensive in comparison with the other lenses I've mentioned above. Now, if only I can afford this set. I'm kinda close (?) hehe, I have: EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM EF 50mm f/1.8 (Mark I) This set serves me well for my needs (for now) and is attainable with my university student budget. I don't have much reach but I find I'm more interested in wide angle than telephoto anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superlite17 Posted January 21, 2005 Author Share Posted January 21, 2005 WOW, great help one and all, thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superlite17 Posted January 21, 2005 Author Share Posted January 21, 2005 Oh, and Grant you have been absolutely no help at all:) Keep hangin around my thread and I will expect ya to have some input! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astcell Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 I sold my Nikon gear and went Canon (for the third time). I got te 1DsII and for lenses got: 24-70/2.8L 70-200/2.8L 400/5.6L Now you ought to know that I sold the 70-200/2.8L to get the IS version and it makes a difference to me. I wish I had purchased this one in the first place. Next on my list, and probably before the rebate runs out, are: 50/1.4 100 Macro Then I'll pretty much be set for lenses until I can afford the 300/2.8IS. I thought about the 20mm, 16-35 or 17-40 and I find that the 24-70 covers what I need the vast majority of the time. I want the 50mm for more light and the 100 as the only macro lens I will have. I did have the Nikon 80-400VR and 70-200VR, they were the way to go. Definitely get the Canon IS lenses if you can afford it. I sold my 70-200 for $150 less than I paid for it, not too shabby for a 6 month old lens. That's less than a dollar a day rental. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 My heads gonna explode just reading this. Why not get something around a 35 f2 and just start walking around? You'll know what YOU need in a few months. www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsksla_ddygff Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 i just sold all my canon gear for the new d2x, sorry cant help ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erin.e Posted January 22, 2005 Share Posted January 22, 2005 I just had a nervous breakdown from reading this rubbish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astcell Posted January 22, 2005 Share Posted January 22, 2005 D2x is not fill frame and I worry if the white balance is as bad as the D2h. My boss wants the D2x but wil wait until the jury returns. And yes, one's head can explode easily here. I think it is easier to find you a wife here than a lens! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erb_duchenne Posted January 22, 2005 Share Posted January 22, 2005 My preferenceCheaper:1)EF-S 10-222)Sigma 24-70/2.83)Sigma 70-200/2.8 More expensive1)EF-S 10-222)EF 24-70/2.8L3)EF 70-200/2.8L IS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_crist Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 I did just what you did - jump to Canon from Nikon (about 4 months ago). I had a D100 with various lenses and sold it all off to get a 20D with flash and 3 lenses. I make money on the side shooting parties, business portraits and weddings but am mostly an advanced hobbiest. I have 3 lenses - 17-40f4L, 24-70f2.8L and 70-200 f4L. For me getting the 70-200 f4L versus the 70-200 f2.8 was a matter of feel. Holding the 2.8 versus the 4 for an hour or so gets tiring. I had the great Nikon 70-200 2.8VR and it got HEAVY. I plan on getting only 2 more lenses (after tax season) the 50mm f1.4 and the 300mm F4 IS. Enjoy your selection whatever you decide. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superlite17 Posted January 23, 2005 Author Share Posted January 23, 2005 Thanks ALL! Steve, I believe I am going to get that exact set of lenses, which seems to be the general consensus of the advice I have gotten! Thank s again to all the very positive posters! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now