Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 30, 2004, 12:42 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 17
Default

hello all, I am getting close to purchasing my 20D and guess what... trying to figure out what lense to get... just like many others I see on this site.

Well, I have more questions, hopefully someone will have insight.

I am really considering the L lenses.

canon17-40 f/2.8L

canon24-70 f/2.8L

canon70-200 f/2.8L (not sure I need this much zoom yet)-but what do I know!

I am not pro,I'm anameteur with future interest in pet photography. I am a very picky person (which tends to make life miserable at times like this), but I am also very picky about my image quality.

What I photogpraph currently: close-ups, indoor family, outdoor family photos, horses, and horse show photos, pets, and landscapes. I like a nice telephoto shot sometimes too, but really what I am always reaching for most is a wide angle to get it all in. (actually I am spoiled and with a system like this I want to be able to take a picture of ANYTHING and have a great photo :-)once I learn to use the tools)

I have picked this camera because I think it is a great camera to start out in digital slr, and could surely help me to grow and maybe end up getting into pet photography one day.

I don't plan to spend money on the EF-S lenses, only if it were really a good deal, because I want to keep these lenses forever, to use whith what ever canon I get in the future. (if I should ever get theeos 1d mark IIused someday... I would cry if all I had was ef-s lenses!

I have a one time chance to do this, I am selling a house and this will be more than likely the only time I ever have this sort of opportunity.

Questions...

1. I am looking at f/2.8 versus 4, because I don't want to be limited in low light situations. (I read that they are better in low light situations, and better for action) Now will this be a problem in any way, and limit me in any other ways, if ALL my lenses are 2.8 ??? Will I still be able to do anything I want to with these lenses inthe future as I learn more and do more?

2. Do I NEED three lenses to cover everything or are there two of those lenses (or some other lenses) that will fit the job?

Ihave been developing quite a list of otheroptions in lenses after reading thru this forum, but to begin with I wanted to go for the best possibility incase I can swing it. Is this the best set up or am I over doing it??

3. Just how close are some of the ex series sigma lenses to these L series lenses, being as picky as I am, even though I am not a pro, (but I am a graphic artist, into the graphic programs and an artist from my early years), am I likely to notice the difference in the picture quality? (I wish Iweren't so darn picky, it would make my life and others around meMUCH easier) I love sharp clear photos. No sense in spending all this money if they won't be excellent photos.

4. If there are any other ideas anyone can throw at me, that I didn't touch on in this subject, I am all ears.... just beginning with this and ofcourse I am wide open to suggestions and pointers!

Becky
Rico1Bad is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 30, 2004, 7:07 AM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Does Canon make an EF 17-40 f/2.8L?

The older EF 17-35 f/2.8L was replaced by the EF 16-35 f/2.8L...

IMO it's all in how 'picky' you're. I'm picky too, but not all my lenses are 'L', but then I also own Minolta, Nikon, and bunch of other brands (including both Hasselblad and Bronica)! :-) :-) :-)


... In the end when people judge a painting do they ask what brand of brushes were used? :idea:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2004, 3:54 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 192
Default

The 17-40 f/4.0 L is considered fine by many. Often people want a fast lens in order to blur the background. This is hard to do effectively with a wide-angle lens, so people consider the f/4.0 to be fine and the price / size advantage of the 17-40 f/4 more important than the 1 stop advantage of the 16-35 f/2.8.

Others think that the f/2.8 level is important to hit for having a brighter viewfinder and high-precision focus sensor.Some others just like spending more money.

The 17-40 gives you a slight edge over the 16-35 in the long end of course, and that's helpful for getting closer to the 70 in the 70-200. This also means that many people don't get the big and expensive 24-70 f/2.8 L when they get the 17-40. I didn't. I've considered getting the Tamron 28-70 f/2.8 as an alternative, but haven't done that (yet) either because covering every mm is not that important.

The 50 1.8 is a great lens, small and light and affordable and optically superb, and also fits within this range. It's still not used as much as I'd like though. In fact, the 17-40 alone serves about 90% of my needs. I'd like to go even wider, not necessarily have more coverage in the "normal-low telephoto" magnification range.

A f/2.8 lens is superior to a f/4.0 lens all else equal -- it just has one more stop of brightness. However, it will also be bigger, heavier, and require more expensive front filters (if such filters are used).

The IS is really handy in a telephoto. But so is a tripod. I use a 70-200 f/4.0 L, often with a tripod, and I'm happy with the tradeoff (price & size over the 1 stop advantage). I added a 1.4x TC for additional reach.

I've also considered getting a Sigma 20 f/1.8 as an alternative to the 17-40 f/4.0. I haven't evaluated one, but there are some reports of it being a great lens, and others merely good. Getting a couple of prime lenses like this is another way to address "low light" needs. You really don't need evey mm to be covered (you only use one focal length at a time, and you can always crop).

There are reports that the Tamron 17-35 f/2.8-4 is excellent.

NHL's right. Photographer > Light > Lens > Camera is a conventional saying, esp. with film cameras, where > is "more important than".

In addition, if you're really really picky, you're bound to be disappointed. Perfect lenses don't exist, nor would they be affordable. The 50 1.8 might be one of the closes approximations.

Madwand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 12:26 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 17
Default

Thanks for all the info. Very helpfull indeed. I am now trying out a few of these lenses at my local camera shop. I fell in love withthem already, but was not so excited about the 100-400L. (the push pull zoom was veryawkward) I don't know if it would be wise to getit or not at this point, I could hold off and see what is out a few years from now in that area. Maybe the 70-200L will be enoughzoom fornow, until they come out with something like the 100-400L, but with the twist zoom, (same price range I hope). There is alot to think about here. I am glad I have time before I purchase.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"Thanks for your insight.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"becky
Rico1Bad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 1:37 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
photosbyvito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,710
Default

hello becky...

i just wanted to point out...although the "L" series lenses are canons optically best lenses...they aren't miracle workers...you still need to have your technique down...

also...you can get very sharp shots from cheaper lenses with good technique

so, if picky, and willing to work and learn..the "L" series would be fine (if you don't mind spending the money )

oh yeah...the 70-200mm f2.8 would be the lens that the f2.8 would be most useful (imo)...the other lenses are lower focal lengths...so they won't amplify the movement as much as the 70-200mm...and you'll want a fast lens for horse shows! especially if they are indoor! the 70-200mm would be very good for your family portraits too!

anyway..the major importance...is the best most expensive equipment doesn't mean anything unless the photographer behind it knows how to use it!

i don't know how long you've been into photography...and you may know all this stuff...so, if you do, just ignore me..lol, but if not...keep that in mind

Vito
photosbyvito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 9:26 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 378
Default

photosbyvito wrote:
Quote:
hello becky...

i just wanted to point out...although the "L" series lenses are canons optically best lenses...they aren't miracle workers...you still need to have your technique down...

also...you can get very sharp shots from cheaper lenses with good technique

That's for sure. Just search the forums for Vito's posted pictures -- he's been using the kit lens that comes with the Dig Reb (if I remember correctly) and his stuff is AMAZING -- pro quality. :!:My kit lens pics are uninspired and technically average at best. Good training will get you a long way!

(P.S. yes, f/2.8 lenses are great, even if/when you have to lug them around!)






perdendosi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 6:23 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 17
Default

hello there. I understand exactly where you guys are coming from, the tenique is the most important factor. I still haveeverything to learn about it, but have been waiting to do this for a long time now. Meanwhile I have been reading as much as I can, so much to learn, but atleast this kind of learning is incredibly fascinating.

I have one opportunity to buy the best possible lenses right now (or soon anyway), and I doubt that I will have this sort of possibility in the future. Therefore, since it is a one time shot at nice lenses, I want to get the best ones I can, and grow into them. Does that make sense? I could go with the less expensive ones, then one day I maybe wishing for these others, and not be in a position to afford them. I am going to learn on the 20d and maybe stay with it forever, but if I ever want to upgrade, I will be able tokeep usingall my lenses, at least that is what I am aiming at.

No doubt I have a long way to go on the learning end, but the fun will start soon. If I already have the best possible lenses I can afford, I will not be in question, "is it the lense or oporator error..." the answer will always be obvious! ha ha. but it is true, I won't have to always be wondering... would it have been better if I had only got the L lenses when I could afford them?... I will always know I have the best possible equipment, and shouldn't ever doubt it or worry I made a mistake. I guess what I am purchasing at this point is peace of mind down the road.

I may hold off on a telephoto zoom, put the money aside for it and wait, until later after I get into it, and learn more with the rest of the equipment. I beleive that may be my best bet, and go with the 17-40 4L, 24-70 2.8L, and the 70-200 2.8L is usm, and a EF 50 1.8, because it is so light, and sharp, and affordable, a break from the weight of the other lenses now and then.

I wish I were ready this minute to do it, because I just found out that if you purchase three lenses from canon, which the ones I picked out qualify, you get to tripple your rebate on each lense!!!! But dang it, I am not ready yet. That rebate offer is good till the end of the year I think. That is what the salesman at the camera shop told me today after he was checking pricing on everything for me. Too bad I am not ready now.

well, thanks again you guys, I will let you know how it turns out, but if you think of anything else I should think of, let me know... I am still all ears!

becky
Rico1Bad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 7:49 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
hedwards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 190
Default

Hi Becky,
I personally have and use the tamron 28-75 f2.8di it doesn't have the quiet quick focus of USM, but it tends to be better than i am. I also was a beginner when i got my 10d a year and a half ago. Took me probably 6-8 months before i was at the point where i was taking more or less full advantage of the lens.

L series are great, and if you can afford them without having to skimp on tripods, then just get the appropriate ones. They are among the best for a reason.

If on the other hand you don't have a tripod and can't afford one in addition to all this, choose the tripod. They really do make a huge difference.

A popular lens that hasn't made your list is "the plastic fantastic" canon's 50mm f/1.8. Nice sharp, fast, and a good value for ~$70.

(edit Take a look at my gallery, most if not all of the shots were taken with the tammy.
hedwards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 8:43 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 17
Default

Yes, you are exactly right, and last night I checked out the EF 50mm 1.8, and it is securely on my list.:-) I have been scouring the forums for great lenses, and that one kept popping up everywhere. My camera shop has it for $89.00

As far as tripods, I have the Bogen Manfrotto on my list. Last evening when I was checking out the lenses, I checked out the tripods too and here is what I came up with...

3021N Tripod Legs with 3030 Head
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...394&is=REG

or

3021N Tripod Legs with 3028 Head
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...#goto_itemInfo

Of course, at first, thetipod legsI had picked outweren't strong enough to stabilize a big lens. The camera shop I am dealing with is very good, very reputable, they helped me pick out a tripod, and showed me the "whys" I need this or that. So, I think this will be the tripod I get, I am just not decided on which head I will purchase.

Any ideas on tripods??? This should be sufficient I think, also going to get the little spike feet, just incase I ever need them, they aren't expensive.

Any ideas on bags for a set up like this? I am guessing I will need two, one for everything, and one for the camera with large lense attached, and maybe room for a second lens, flash and a few small accessories.

well, now I am getting excited again, it is all finally starting to fall in place. By the time I am ready to go and get the set up, I should know what to get. (many thanks to you guysand all the others on this forum discussing their slr systems and lenses. This is a great forum, I have liked using this forum better than others.

Becky

Rico1Bad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 9:11 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
hedwards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 190
Default

I have ordered the legs 3001BPRO and head 3028 which i think is similar, both Bogen Manfrotto. I would check on the weight to see if that is a problem. For me i wouldn't buy a tripod that size for my typical back country outings. But for short walks or easily accessable locations that shouldn't be a problem.
hedwards is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:31 PM.