What lens for D20?

[Philip Freedman]

I am seriously considering buying a D20 and would like some advice

as to choice of lenses. I mainly do a mixture of people and

architectural/travel photography and rarely go outside 28mm to 90mm

(on traditional 24x35 format); I often just use a 50mm lens. I want

high resolution, little distortion, decent build, a bright

viewfinder image, and fast focusing. I was going to add "and not

too large or heavy" but I expect that is not compatable with the

other requirements. Any ideas?

[John Crowe]

Well your 50mm lens will get you a good portrait length lens. For the wide end you could go with a 20/2.8 and for normal the 28/2.8. If you have the money and would like a zoom then the 17-40/4L with your 50mm should just about cover you. Good luck!

[jim_larson1]

Prime: 35/2 ($330 ish)

Zoom: 17-40/4L ($650)

 

Cheaper zoom: 24-85 ($330ish)

or 18-55/EF-S ($100 ish) if you are on a real tight budget.

[mvw photo]

The 50mm prime f/1.8 is great as it is very cheap and very sharp - good portrait lens and whatever you buy, I'd add this to it.

 

I have the 18-55 kit lens ("ok") and this 50mm prime, and now want to add the 17-85 or other lenses.. no, not want: "need"... but need more money first...

 

Michael

[steve_dunn2]

<p>Translated into the focal lengths you'll need on a 1.6-crop body like the 20D, you rarely go outside 17-56, and often just use 31. Getting little distortion is going to be tough if you want to go with a zoom; even pro zooms tend to have moderate distortion at one or both ends (compared with consumer zooms, which tend to have pretty serious distortion at one or both ends).</p>

 

<p>The 17-55 kit lens covers the range and isn't too large or heavy but doesn't do as well on the rest of the requirements. There's a new 17-85 lens available with the 20D, which one would expect to be a step up from the 17-55, but as it doesn't appear to have made it into stores yet, there aren't a lot of end-user reviews of it. And chances are it will suffer from a fair bit of distortion; that's par for the course with zooms.</p>

 

<p>The 17-40/4L USM plus the 50/1.8 or 50/1.4 USM covers the range pretty well. You get high resolution, relatively little distortion on the 50 and throughout much of the zoom's range, good build on the zoom (and on the 50/1.4 - the 50/1.8 isn't so great in this area), a bright viewfinder with the 50 and probably not too bad with the zoom (if the 20D's viewfinder responds to fast lenses anything like my Elan 7E's viewfinder does, there's not a whole heck of a lot of difference in brightness between f/2.8 and faster, and f/4 isn't that much darker), and fast focusing on the zoom (Canon doesn't seem to be able to build a fast-focusing 50). Either 50 is small and light - particularly the 50/1.8 - and the 17-40 isn't too big or heavy.</p>

 

<p>If you want a prime to replace your current 50, then the 35/2 is probably what you want. There's also the 35/1.4L USM for quicker AF and a faster aperture, but there's a big size, weight, and price penalty for the extra stop. If you get a 35, then the question is whether the 17-40 goes long enough (it stops at an equivalent of 64mm).</p>

 

<p>Or you could go with primes. 20/2.8 USM, 35/2, and 50/1.8 or 50/1.4 USM would cover most of the range and meet most if not all of your requirements. For architectural work, you might throw in the <a href="http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=156&modelid=7328">TS-E 24/3.5L</a>, if 24x1.6=38 is a useful focal length for your architectural photography.</p>

 

<p>Another note on the bright viewfinder comment - there's been some debate as to whether the 20D's viewfinder is a bit brighter, a bit dimmer, or about the same as the 10D's viewfinder. The 10D, like most other smaller-than-35mm-sensor DSLRs, is not known for having the world's brightest viewfinder.</p>

[mark u]

Why not have the benefits of an f/2.8 lens? Brighter finder, more DOF control, faster and more accurate focussing. Especially if the image quality is comparable with Canon L glass. Which lens provides these on a 20D? Sigma's 18-50 f/2.8. Check out some sample images here:

 

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/18-50_28_ex_dc

 

Compare with Canon's 17-40 f/4L here:

 

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_1740_4l

 

Look at a comparative review here:

 

http://www.jasonlivingston.com/sigma-review/

 

(You don't need Japanese text support)

[edshrop]

Lens prices for the 20D start as low as just under $100 and go as high as you want (used car prices). I think without giving a range of what you want to spend you will get a lot of different answers and few which are helpful unless you are lucky enough to be on an unlimited budget.

 

Ed

[bob_bell]

Aside from the heavy part, get a 24-70/2.8L great lens. If you need more length you could buy a 100mm USM Macro and have a good portrait and great macro lens.

[erin.e]

Go to your best stocked local bookshop and buy a book about Single Lens Reflex Photograhy for Beginners including some DSLR component. If you can locate a secondhand copy of Micheal Freemans "35mm Handbook" that includes a comprehensive coverage in some detail of all the techniques that you would ever require to learn how to use an single lens reflex camera. Then you will have enough knowledge to come to your own conclusions about what lense's you actually require for the type of photography you wish to do.

 

You will get some good advice on the net, but plenty of opinions on how to spend your hard earned money that are not worth much, to sort through to get the good stuff. How can you know what is the good stuff if you have to post such a question in the first place? How can you trust the replies?