upsman Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 I have a Digital Rebel XT and I'm thinking of instead of upgrading my camera taking advantage of Canon's rebate and get 3 lenses. I take a lot of pics of birds, scenery, macro, portrait - I love all of it. I am now disabled/retired and photography is what keeps me going. I started taking pics with a 35mm over 30 years ago. I got into the digital age about 3 years ago after being out of photography for about 5 years. I want an array of 3 quality lenses and willing to spend about $2500 or so for them. I definitely want a macro and a zoom but uncertain about a third lens as I have the 18-55mm basic lens from the camera which I've been satisfied with. I also have the basic 70-300 zoom I bought 3 years ago, and though I've taken some great shots with it - in reading up on lenses I've probably missed more than I've captured. So any ideas I would appreciate it as I plan on calling B&H on Monday morning with my order. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vuyisich Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 canon 10-22 mm (wide angle landscapes) canon 28-135 IS (everything else except macro) canon 100 mm macro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknagel Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 My favorite lenses are my 70-200/2.8IS ($1700 + $50 Rebate at B&H), 24-70/2.8 ($1150 + $45 rebate) and for Macro 100mm/2.8 Macro ($470 + $20 rebate) That's $2975 and you'd have about the best lenses Canon has to offer. If you wanted to stay closer to $2500 you could get the non IS version of the 70-200/2.8, but IS is a must in my book. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayhai Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 I would say the 17-40L, 70-200 2.8L, 50 1.8 (or 1.4), and maybe the 60mm macro. Just ideas, I don't really know about the macro though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upsman Posted January 6, 2006 Author Share Posted January 6, 2006 I want to add that I find myself taking a lot of pics at the 300mm focal length of my old zoom and I wonder if the 200mm focal length will be satisfactory for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_larson1 Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Satisfied with 18-55 eh? Then. . . 1) 100/2.8 Macro. ($370ish) 2) 70-300/IS ($570) 3) 50/1.8 ($75) (really! Go buy it! It has the best optics of this lot!) 4) 420EX flash. ($175) Invest the rest of the money .. . learn how to play with these toys. . ..and get ready to spend more later! If you must buy another lens now. . .consider the 24-105/IS ($1250)(really!). . . although with the other lenses. . .you may not really need it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjc photographic images Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Maybe the "100-400L IS" would be better for you if you shoot alot at the 300 end of your existing lens. For Macro I have the 50mm 2.5 compact macro lens which I use for macro and portraits, I can also recommend the 24-70f/2.8L,whereas a lot of people swear by the new 24-105L. I don't know whether this will help you but here is a previous thread about peoples favourite 3 lenses and why they are their favourites http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Ei0U I don't know which lenses are in the canon rebate but I would hazard a guess and say the 50mm 2.5 would not be included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upsman Posted January 6, 2006 Author Share Posted January 6, 2006 I was considering the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS yet I haven't heard much feedback in it. I hear a whole lot on the 70-200 2.8 Is this lens that much superior than the 100-400 - it does cost more. I am also concerned about flexiblity in the depth of field as some of my shots I look for a wide DOF and some a shallow on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjc photographic images Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 I have the 70 - 200 2.8L non "IS" and it is as good as everybody says it is. I cannot comment on the 100-400 as I dont own this particular lens yet. I am hoping to buy either the 100-400L or the 400 f/5.6L in the next few weeks. I am leaning toward the 400 prime because as far as I can tell the optics are better.Here is a link to some reviews on canon lenses. http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck_c_charlottenc_ Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Andrew, The combination of lenses that cover the majority of my photography are the Canon 17-40mm f4.0L, the Canon 50mm f1.8, and the New Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS. All three of these lenses are very sharp. You mentioned that you have the 70-300 zoom that you bought 3 years ago... and I'd like to suggest that you sell that lens and buy the New 70-300mm. Check out the reviews on the FredMiranda site that is provided by fellow helper, above. //Chuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrspock Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 You'll really enjoy the 100-400 L IS for bird photography Either 17-85 IS or 17-40L for wide angle 100mm for macro and portrait photography There's your $2500 give or take a few bucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheldonnalos Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Working off the rebate list - with a budget of ~$2500 (after rebates) and your photographic interests. I'm also basically assuming you want to upgrade your current lenses rather than supplement them. My first recommendation would include more than three lenses:<P> 1) 17-40mm f/4 L<br> 2) 50mm f/1.4<br> 3) 70-200mm f/4 L <br> 4) 100mm f/2.8 Macro<br> 5) 400mm f/5.6 L Prime - excellent quality and long reach for birds!<p> The total cost for this would be $2770 after rebates, a little over budget - but MAN what a kit! If you had to simplify this, I would possibly lose the 70-200mm and 400mm prime, and replace it with a 100-400mm L zoom. That would take the cost down to $2550. I think the 70-200mm would be a little more user friendly (size) for medium telephoto work, and you could use the 400mm as a specialty birding lens. You will also definetely get better quality from the 70-200mm and 400mm prime combo than from the 100-400mm. If you liked the list, but the budget didn't work, you could drop the 50mm f/1.4 and replace it with a 50mm f/1.8 to save $200. <p> Hope this helps!<P> Sheldon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcgarity Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 I can't speak to the quality of the EF 100-400mm as I have never used it. But I have heard good things about it. The people I have known that own it generally love it. The one drawback it has is softness at 400mm. Or so I am told. I own and use the EF 300mm f4L IS. Its a hard act to beat. I think its around $1200. If you get it, you owe it to yourself to also pick up the EF 1.4TC for around $270. You get some serious reach on an XT with this pair while retaining excellent optical quality. For birds there is no such thing as too much reach. The EF 70-200mm f4L is as good optically as the EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS. But it cost about a third as much. Last time I looked it was around $570. You probably get more bang for the buck with it than with any other L series lens. You certainly can't go wrong with it. It also retains excellent optical performance when paired with the EF 1.4 TC. I don't use mine a lot. But am very happy with it when I do. For landscape and scenery the EF 17-40mm f4L has an excellent reputation. I don't this lens but from what I have read its a gem. I believe its around $700. If you want real wide angle there is only one way to go and thats with the EF-S 10-22mm. Its will deliver the goods. It is L quality without the stripe. I know that personally I was blown away when I started using this lens. I quit worrying about the fact that it is an EF-S lens the first time I saw the results of an outing with it. I paid $799 in late 2004. I doubt its changed that much in price. Macro advice I will leave to others because I use and prefer a manual focus micro Nikkor for macro aplications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknagel Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 I have the 70-200/2.8is and 100-400IS, both are great lenses! The 70-200 is sharper in its range, slightly. Stopped down to f/8-f/11 I think its a wash. But, the 100-400 is sharper from 200-400 when compared to the 70-200 with the 1.4x or 2x converters even stopped down. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phyrpowr Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 The three I own are the 10-22 EF-S, 28-135 IS, and the 100-400 IS, and am just as happy as a clam at high tide. ABout $2500 before the rebates I also got a Tamron 28-75 2.8, and it MIGHT be a little better landscape lens than my 28-135, iffy, some focal lengths/apertures, but it's good for motion stopping shots None are true macro though: the 28-135 and the Tamron are close focusing, and a less expensive extender and close up lens combo could pretty much do the trick 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