klechak photography Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 So I have the canon 40D. If I decide to keep it, it will be coming to europe with me. I have the 28-135 right now and I would eventually replce it with the 70-200L. Which combo should I go with? Either: 17-40L, and a 50mm (1.4) or 60mm OR 10-22, and a 50mm (1.4) or 60mm Thanks for your help all! Colin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdigi Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Do you think a full frame camera is in your near future? If not how about just a Canon EF-S 17-55 IS 2.8 or Tamron 17-50 2.8? But if I had to pick from your 2 choices, It sounds like you like wide and if thats the case I would probably go for option 2. I personally don't see 17-40 at f4 that useful on a crop body but many love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klechak photography Posted November 12, 2008 Author Share Posted November 12, 2008 That is exactly what I was thinking.. if I go full frame It wont be for 2-3 maybe even 4 years. SO then the 50 or the 60 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anders_carlsson Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 As you no doubt realize the 17-40 and 10-22 are very different kinds of lenses. Noone can reply decisively since your choice depends on your own photographic style. Having said that, I can only add that a standard zoom is very handy but not always all that exciting to use in an urban environment (if that's where you're going). I could easily do with an ultra-wide zoom and a 24/28/35mm prime combo (on a 1.6x crop body). Or with either one alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klechak photography Posted November 12, 2008 Author Share Posted November 12, 2008 mostly shooting in urban environments. I would like to add a little wide to my set. I have the 28-135 and will replace that in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdigi Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Colin since you have the 28-135 why not just add the 10-22. that makes for a nice kit. I have the 24-105 and I am doing the same. I just cant make up my mind between the 10-22 or the Tokina 11-16. Maybe then just ad a 50 1.8 or 1.4 to the mix and you got a great set of lenses that cover anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rj russell Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 For all around good coverage the 17-40, 50 or 60 plus the 70-200 would be fantastic! 17-40 is a great lens and would be very well suited for most of your urban requirements, many love the 50f1.4 but it is what it is a portrait lens (a rather dull focal legnth for anything else on a crop body) and owning it myself I would opt for the 60 for its macro capability (portrait and macro in one lens= win/win). On the other hand if you would like to add some drama to your urban photography while keeping the 40D, the 10-22 is a must! There is a huge diference between 10 and 17mm, and shooting ultra-wide is an art in itself. I opted for Sigma's 10-20 and it is a superb piece of glass! However I could not live with the hole between 22 and 50 or 60... therefore I'd recommend the 17-40L or 17-55 f2.8 IS and later down the road when you get itch to spend again buy that ultra-wide! Happy Shooting (and shopping), Ryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kasperhettinga Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I have a set of sigma 10-20, canon 28-135 and 70-300...nice set :) I would choose the 60 over the 50, as the 60 would be macro&portrait and 50 portrait only (for me). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne_campbell Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Get em all. What the heck. We have to jump start this economy somehow; might as well do it right here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthijs Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 In regard to the 50 vs 60 discussion: if you want to play with narrow depth of field the 50 is way faster than the 60. (And that 10mm extra does not compress the DoF that much.) 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