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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 15, 2005, 9:44 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6
Default

My wife and I have been enjoying digital photography for some time and feel ready to take the plunge on a SLR. We've decided to go with the Canon 20D and are looking for advice on our initial lens purchases. We can spend $1500-2000 on initial lenses.

Our current cameras are a Fujifilm F700 (35-105mm 35mm equivalent) and Canon S1 IS (38-380mm 35mm quivalent). I've included a link to a small gallery of typical shots -
http://www.edwintech.com/Favorites/index.html

Most of our shooting is outdoor landscape or portrait. We do a little bit of indoor portrait (ie the kids), but I figure the Canon 50mm/f1.8 can fit this bill cheaply. We shoot from our boat a fair bit which motivates fast lens or IS. Most of our outdoor work is in good daylight.

I'm leaning towards the Canon 75-300 DO IS to take care of the telephoto end. Based on the online reviews, it's a compromise in terms of cost vs.performance, but is hard to beat on size and weight. This would eat about $1200 of my budget.

I'm really not sure what to do on the wide zoom side. The EF-S 17-85mm IS would probably be good, but one of the f2.8 zooms from Tamron or Sigma might also be good - trading the IS for more speed. There are plenty of other EF lenses in the <75mm range also.

Thoughts and suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

- virgil
vzett is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 16, 2005, 4:41 AM   #2
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

I have a 2-lens solution for my 20D, the 17-85 & 70-300 DO, which I'm sure would work well for you too. ($1800 for the two).

However, looking at your gallery I think you could really benefit from extra capabilities at the ultra wide-angle end and probably spend a bit less on the telephoto.

Having 3 lenses is a lot less convenient than 2, however if I were you I would seriously consider getting 3 lenses:

1) An ultra-wide zoom - either the Canon EF-S 10-22mm ($800) or the Sigma 12-24 ($670)

2) Standard zoom - either the new Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX DG Macro ($410) or the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 XR Di ($370)

3) Canon EF 70-200 f4 L ($580) for portraits and medium-telephoto outdoor work or Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX ($800)

Possibly add sigma 1.4x TC ($170) or Canon 1.4x TC later if you felt the need.

My selection would be Sigma 12-24 + Sigma 24-70 + Canon 70-200 = $1660.

peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2005, 5:34 AM   #3
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

FYI - There's some new 'kid'(s) on the block:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05...gma10-20dc.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05021404sigma30dc.asp
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2005, 6:16 AM   #4
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Ooh - interesting.

Care to guess at a price on the 10-20mm?

I suppose most likely to be ~50% of the Canon 10-22mm. So around $400???

Very tempting for an occasional lens.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2005, 7:15 AM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

I'm sure it will be priced competitively like most Sigma are - The key feature of the 10-20mm is its size though, the 12-24mm is HUGE and more apt for a full-frame... Did you see the rest of them? They totally revamped the whole line and added a few more: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05...sigma10dgs.asp



BTW IMO the price difference between the Canon 70-200 f/4L and the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8EX is a moot point - Like most people have pointed out already: the Sigma comes with a removeable tripod mount, and if anyone has to add this extra purchase to the 70-200 f/4L then the price will be on parity. What you don't get is the extra 'Bokeh' of the faster lens and the higher precision focus of the 20D at the larger f/2.8 aperture...
+ you can get an acceptable reach of 400mm with a 2xTC :idea:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2005, 4:53 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 56
Default

I have the 20D and 17-40L, 70-300 DO, and 50/1.8. I wish I had a longer lens for nature shots of animals. The 300 isn't enough. I'm going to take a good look at the new Sigma 50-500mm for digital when it comes out. The reviews on the current 50-500mm are quite good. I don't think a TC is recommended for the 70-300 DO.
hkrautter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2005, 6:49 PM   #7
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

very interesting NHL.. thanks for the info.. that 10-20 sigma looks like it could find a home soon as the widest i have now is my canon 28-135 is.. and the canon 10-22 is just too pricey right now..

virgil take a look at this slight modifcation to peripatetic's combination..

*new* sigma 10-20 + sigma 24-70 f2.8 + sigma 100-300 f4.0 apo if (now offered in DG=digitally optimized)

that should cover your ranges quite well with good fast lenses and with a 1.4 teleconverter that 300 to extend it out past 400 at f5.6...

good luck, Dustin
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2005, 9:50 AM   #8
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

I agree - that's a better combo than I had.

Except just possibly for the size & weight of the big zoom if you are extremely averse to big lenses.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2005, 10:35 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

Yes, that 10mm-20mm looks very interesting.

Remember the good old EOS digital 1.6 crop. Makes all my formerly short lenses into midrangezoomsincludingmy old19mm-35mm which now acts as a 30mm-56mm used to in the former 35mm world.

The 10mm-20mm will get you a 16mm-32mm equivalent which is back in the ultra wide to wide angle range.Especially if the price is right

Peter.
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2005, 2:35 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6
Default

Thanks for the help here. It's definately opened my eyes to better possibilities than I had been thinking.

Anyone care to comment on the relative pros and cons of the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 vs. the Tamron 28-75 f2.8?

- virgil
vzett 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 9:11 AM.