Canon D-Rabel XTI

[alexandar_iotzov]

I have to upgrade. I?m not Canon user, but due to the physics of CMOS

semiconductors which generate low noise I decide to use Canon.

 

For my budget and for what I?m using the camera (stock photography anywhere and

everywhere) I choose Canon D-Rebel XTI body with Canon 70-200f/4 L USM. For

under 70mm I was thinking to buy Sigma 24-70 Ex Macro.

 

Please advice what for under 70mm and does the combination that I selected is

worthy or not?

 

Thanks

[alan_rockwood]

If you want a fixed focal length portait lens then consider either a 50mm f/1.8 or 50mm f1/1.4 lens. These have an equivalent angle of view to an 80mm portrait lens on a 35mm camera. They are sharper than almost any soom lens. They are less expensive than the higher quality zoom lenses. They are lighter than most of the higher quality zoom lenses. They are faster than almost any zoom lens. In other words, they are better in every way except for one: they don't zoom.

 

For a pretty good general purpose zoom get either a 17-55mm f/2.8 zoom or a 17-85mm zoom. Both are image stablized. The 17-5mm is faster. As to which is sharper, it just depends on whose test results you read and believe.

 

As for the 24-70mm lens consider this. It might be the right choice, but you are pretty much giving up the wide angle side because on a crop body camera like a 24mm lens has an equivalent image angle to a 38mm lens on a 35mm camera.

[colinsouthern]

If it were me, I'd be looking towards the Canon EF24-70mm F2.8L USM as my 2nd lens

[jimstrutz]

24mm isn't wide enough on a small frame camera like the XTi. Yes, I know that's just a personal opinion, but I can't help it if I'm always right. :)

 

The Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS is the best all around normal zoom lens for crop frame cameras. On an XTi it has the equivalent focal length of 27-88mm -- Just about perfect for a normal zoom. It's the sharpest lens in its class, it's AF system is second to none, and it has Image Stabilization. Nothing better is offered today.

[bob_osullivan]

There's also a Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 that is very impressive image quality, fast focus and not expensive $390. It's on my XTi most of the time. It also has decent macro ability 1:2

 

I agree that no matter what other lenses you get, you MUST get a 50 1.8 for $80 it's image quality is superb for the price, nice background blur for portraits also right focal length (80 on your XTi) and good low light lens.

 

These would be a great compliment to your 70-200F4 which is also a fine lens, I have that too.

[jim_larson1]

All of this is good general advice.

 

But if you are shooting PRODUCT PHOTOGRAPHY, that implies you are working on a tripod with bright lights (or strobes). It also means that "Depth of field" is not critical. Having a ZOOM is also not critical, since you will be picking your camera position.

 

The 70-200/4L is an excellent choice. It is an awesome lens at a bargain price. Has the best image quality of all the 70-xx zooms. Many claim the 70-200/2.8L-IS is better -> but I suspect that thinking is biased by the image stabilization of that lens.

 

On the wide end, I would strongly consider the 17-40/4L coupled with the 50/1.4 prime.

 

The 17-55/2.8-IS is a prosumer zoom. More expensive than the 17-40/4L and 50/1.4 combined because of (1) high Canon profit margin, (2) F2.8 and (3) Image Stabilization. Do you need any of those features? The 17-85/IS is in the same class as the 17-55/2.8, but is a slower lens (and frankly. . .lower image quality).

 

If faster aperture is essential, then the 24-70/2.8L can't be beat. But this is a pricy lens. More than the 17-55/2.8-IS.

 

For product work with shallow depth of field, I would go for the 35/2 and 50/1.4 to complement the 70-200/4L zoom. If you need wider. . consider the 24/2.8 either in addition to or in place of the 35/2. Note that the Canon wide prosumer primes are not that great in terms of image quality. The 17-40/4L is probably better than the 20/2.8 and probably equal to the 24/2.8 (although slower). I suspect that the 35/2 is better than zoom. The 50/1.4 and 50/1.8 are superior to the "L" zooms. (I have the 17-40/4L, 24/2.8, 35/2 and 50/1.8)

 

Or. . you could go completely nuts and go for the 24/1.4L and 35/1.4L. :)

 

(My money would go for the 17-40/4L and 50/1.4L. With the money you earn, then go buy the 24-105/4L-IS for vacation :) )

[alexandar_iotzov]

Thanks Gents,

 

It was impressive. Thanks!

 

Obviously with relation to the prices I have to consider and to go with fixed lenses than to zooms under 70 mm. Before with my Film SLR Praktica L (it was manufactured in 1972 in Germany and it is still worked) I had only fixed telephotos. The most used was 135 mm/3.5, after that 50mm/2.8, middle frequency used were 24mm/4 and 200 mm/4. The less used was 400mm/6.5. Obviously one good 7-200/4L USM together with fixed 50mm and one short 24mm or 18mm will be grate combination. I don?t know about Canon Rebel XTI there are so many opinion in the Internet. Most objections are the small plastic body and bed manual focus as well as smaller LCD display. I can afford 70-200f/2.8 as money and weight/sizes. I?m engineer and travel all the time for couple of weeks or months. The cameras and accessories are extra over my other luggage every kilogram and cubic centimeter is count. I always can left one of the fixed lenses at home.

 

Thanks again Alex

[frank g.]

Consider the Tamron 28-75 2.8 it is tack sharp and provides image quality as good as the 24-70l without the robust build quality and weather proofing About $399