What do you carry for between 10-22 and 100-400?

[photohns]

Hi, I was wondering what anyone's opinions are on the lenses they use if carrying the 10-22 and 100-400. I am

looking for a 3 lens set, 4 tops. Does anyone find the 24-105 combination to cause alot of swapping lenses? I was

thinking of that lens or the 17-55 but not sure of the gap between 55 and 100. Any help is appreciated, thanks!

[nhut-nguyen]

how about the 28-300 f/3.5-5.6L IS ?

[jonathan_j._weber]

After 35 years as a Canon FD freelancer, I just introduced myself to the Canon EOS digital world for the first time last week.

 

I opted for the EF 28 - 135mm lens to fit between my EF-S 10 -22mm and EF 100 - 400mm for my 30D camera. I am more than pleased with the choice, especially with its "close-up" option.

 

Jonathan

[anders_carlsson]

I wouldn't personally worry so much about not having the 55-100 range on a 1.6x crop camera unless I knew that I

needed it specifically. The main question for me would be how I move around in wide-angle territory. So, if you use

your 10-22 in the 17-22 range a lot you might have an indication of something. Namely that a 17-XX is a better option

than a 24-105. Maybe a 17-40 and a nice fast prime in the 50-100 range?

[geoffm]

I use just that combination (10-22, 24-105, 100-400) and am very happy with it. I would find the gap from 55-100 inconvenient. I would also hate to have to mount the 100-400 every time I wanted to shoot at 100mm. I was concerned about lens swapping at the 22/24 point, but it doesn't seem to be much of a problem, for me at least.

 

However it does depend on one's individual style. You just have to think it through - at what focal lengths do you do most of your shooting?

[bob_king2]

"However it does depend on one's individual style. You just have to think it through - at what focal lengths do

you do most of your shooting?"

 

I agree. I find I shoot a lot in the 17-35 range. For a while I tried a 10-22, 24-85 and 70-200 combo. I found

that I was making numerous lens swaps at the wide end. I opted for the 17-55 f/2.8 to replace the 24-85, so I

don't think a 24-105 would have worked for me. What do you use now for the 22-100 range? Check your EXIF data

to see how much you use above and below 24mm in a shooting session. That will tell you how much you would have

had to swap lenses.

 

Cheers, Bob

[lou_miller]

I have the 10-22 and use the 24-105 as my main lens. I find it an excellent range even in a 1.6 crop body. I personally do not find myself swapping it out a lot for want of more range on the wide side but I think it depends on your use. I use the 24-105 for candid and posed people shots as well as landscapes. Having used a 17-55 for a few weeks, I found that I missed the long side and was swapping to a 70-200 quite a bit so I moved to the 24-105 and have been very happy with this decision. I may be in the minority on this forum with this opinion, but I really think it depends on whether you like to shoot more on the telephoto side or the wide side in your everyday use.

[mwaks]

I have the 10-22 and 100-400. Both are for special needs. For in between I mostly use a 70-300 for walking around. If working a room with people the 17-85.

[tdigi]

Lou I am with you, I also feel 50mm is a bit short so I opted for a 24-105 f4 as well over the 17-55. I am still considering a

wide angle solution. I think it really depends on what you like to shoot. I find the 24-105 to be a very versatile high quality

lens that I keep on my camera about 75% of the time.

[steve santikarn]

there is also the relatively new 18-200mm EF-S lens which woud neatly cover the gap between your existing lenses.

[phyrpowr]

I have the 10-22/24-105/100-400 also. No complaints. Like Lou & TommyDiG., I'm usually on the longer end of the 24-105 more than the WA anyway, so I'd feel rather limited by the 17-55, and I didn't care for the IQ on the two 17-85s I sampled.

 

FWIW, my old 28-135 was a gem, sort of wish I still had it to try on my new (used) 5D

[mars c]

I dont have the 100-400, But I have the 70-300, 10-22 , 17-85 and 24-105.

 

The 10-22 and 24-105 is a nice match , But the 10-22 and 17-85 is nicer.

[dan_hall4]

I keep my 24-105 on my 40D 80% of the time. The 10-22 and 100-400 come out when I need them. Great system. But it would depend on your interest. For most people, the 24-105 would be hard to beat. A great walking around lens and it is very high quality. The previously mentioned 28-135 is a door stop by comparison. Gave mine away when I got the 24-105.

[kasperhettinga]

I have a 10-20 / 28-135 / 70-300 setup

 

I use the 10-20 for city/landscape work, the 28-135 for people and the 70-300 when I need the extra range. 28-135 is on 70% of the time, the others 15% each. I don't feel urge to swap often.

 

I used the 17-70 before I had the 28-135. The 70mm was often too short for me, but changing all the time for 70-300 was inconvenient. At the same time, I didn't use the 17-30mm range much, so I don't miss that range in my 28-135.

[burger]

I use the 10-22, 24-205L and the 100-400L (I also have the 100mm macro). One do change a lot, but I use two bodies, one with the 100-400 almost always one and I change the other 2 lenses on my other body. From 10-400mm, this was the best option for my money.

[phyrpowr]

Would like to add, now have 24-105 on 5D, 70-300 IS on 40D, 10-22 either in bag alone or on XT.

 

100-400 only goes along on "serious" shoots, & after a few trips to the gym

[rayyeager]

Hi Hans. I have the 10-22, 24-105, 70-200, and 100-400. The 24-105 was my most used and also my favorite lens on my 40D ... Ray.

[JDMvW]

For the crop bodies, the one indispensable "street" or "walkabout" lens is the 17-85mm IS. It has warts but they are not much of a problem in real world use aside from architectural photography. On the other hand, the 24-105 is a very fine lens, if not so much of an all-in-one solution on crop bodies (it being essentially similar on FF to the 17-85 on 15x22 sensor bodies)

[anish]

I use the tamron 28-75 to complement my 10-22. it is as sharp, if not sharper, than the 10-22 and was only $400. i highly recommend it.

 

Anish

[Jeff Lear]

I went the 17-40/24-105/100-400 route (on a 5D) and have a 50/1.4 as a sort of specialty lens.

[andreasb]

I started with a Sigma 10-20mm, a Sigma 18-200mm IS and a Canon 100-400mm IS. This worked great because the 18-200mm was my main lens for almost everything, and I could focus on learning how to use everything rather than switching lenses all the time.

 

Once my skills improved, I switched out the 18-200mm with a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 and a Canon 70-200mm f/2.8. With the 10-22mm and 100-400mm, I have 10-400mm covered with relatively decent glass and my resulting photos improved quite a bit. The 18-200mm was a great lens to learn with and is still a good choice for me when I need to travel light. The 70-200mm and 100-400mm get very heavy after a while!

 

Recently I have had a few chances to try some prime lenses (Sigma 20mm, 30mm and 50mm). My guess is that a year from now, my kit will be shorter primes (under 100mm) with the 70-200mm and 100-400mm.

 

Never the less, the 18-200mm lenses available from Sigma and Canon with IS are good starter lenses for someone who does not want to switch lenses often and does not want to carry a lot of weight. My Sigma worked great for me and still does. But there are better lenses and the results show it.

 

Good luck!

[William Michael]

> Any help is appreciated <

 

My (zoom) kit has a different approach, but it does cover between 10 to 400, (assumed APS-C FoV equivalent), and at speed, with only two lenses:

 

16 to 35/F2.8LMkII; 70 to 200/F2.8L; x1.4MkII; x2MkII; 5D; 20D.

 

I do not miss the 56 to 70 (equiv. FoV 135 format)

 

I do not use the x2MkII on the 70 to 200 often, but when I do, the results are more than acceptable, if the lens + teleconvereter combination is used at F8 to F11.

 

WW

[Stock-Photos]

My combo for the 5D is Sigma 12-24, (just received it Friday) Canon 24-105 and 100-400. No overlap. 100MM macro also. The 24-105 has great image quality and the IS allows hand held shots at super-slow shutter speeds.

 

http://www.slidescanning123.com/route-1-saugus/

 

The 24-105 has significant distortion though:

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/7656289&size=lg

 

Go for the 24-105, it's an amazing lens. I wrote a min review of it here:

 

http://www.slidescanning123.com/canon-lens-reviews/