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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 22, 2005, 2:35 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 7
Default

I have 2 out of the 3 items to get the triple rebates. My search for a rebate buddy has come to a dead end, so I am thinking that I should just get a 3rd item so I don't lose the $115 in rebates on my first two items. Here's what I have:

Canon 20D w/ 18-55mm kit lens
EF 70-300 4-5.6 IS USM
EF 50mm f/1.8 prime

I am thinking either the EF 28-135mm IS, EF 17-40 L.

The 135mm seems to be pretty versatile and is $200+ cheaper than the L lens. Without a specific need in mind for a lens are there any suggestions? Is there a lens that would complement my current setup better than another? Should I just forget about it and stick with what I have? I just hate to leave $160-$200 in rebates on the table. That's a good discount.

I use this camera for general recreational photography: portraits, sporting events, fishing trips, landscapes, school events, etc. I'm pretty new to photography in general but want to start out on the right foot.

Thanks,

John


jpcampbell is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 22, 2005, 5:12 PM   #2
Member
 
eosthree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 48
Default

Hi John, nice kit you are assembling.
If I were you, I would get:
20D body only.
17-40 f/4L
70-200 f/4L
50 f/1.8

I don't really know about the new 70-300 4-5.6 IS USM, I do know however the older versions of this lens(75-300)weren't stellar beyond 200mm, being rather soft. I would hope Canon would have improved on this, but I haven't done any research on the new lens. I see 300mm as being desireable, but if this new lens is soft, I don't know how useful the extra length would be, although if you need this length, having it is better than not having it.
The 70-200 f/4L is by all accounts a very sharp lens, and will not dissappoint. It is true professional glass with fantastic contrast and color, not to mention being very sharp. Add a converter in the future and you'll have your 300mm with very good quality.
The kit lens would basically be a duplicate of the 17-40 and therefore you really won't need one or the other. The 17-40 simply blows away the kit lens in contrast, color, and sharpness, there is really no comparison, but then there shouldn't be any comparison between a $100 lens and a $600 lens.
The 50 f/1.8 is a bargain of a lens, great for low light. The build quality leaves a lot to be desired, but it's a no brainer for the price.
eosthree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2005, 6:04 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 7
Default

I already have the items I mentioned. The 70-300 gets great reviews and I'm satisfied so far for sure. The IS is great for chasing my kid around at ballet class.

I was thinking if I got the 17-40 lens, it would be basically a replacement for the kit lens. The 28-135mm for that matter would probably be used more often than the kit lens, but at the wide end I may miss something. Maybe I should bite the bullet and get the 17-40, sell the kit lens (i know some people buying Rebel bodies), and just work around the 50mm - 70mm gap that will be there. The extra $200 is significant, but if it is a lens that will stay with me for a very long time, it may be worth it.

jpc
jpcampbell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2005, 7:25 PM   #4
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

how about replace the kit lens with the 17-85 EF-s IS.. its about the same price as the 17-40 and will give you longer zoom range with image stabilization as well as being a better focal lenth on a 1.6x body than the 28-135 IS.. you kind of get the best of both worlds here.. its not quite as good as the 17-40 on the wide end, a little more distortion, but for anything but hardcore architecture, i doubt you would notice the difference.. i have a feeling the 17-85 would be on your camera ALOT..

cheers,
dustin
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2005, 9:57 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 7
Default

The EF-S 17-85 was not on my list because it does not qualify for the rebates.

jpc
jpcampbell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2005, 11:20 AM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 7
Default

I've had some great suggestions. I'm narrowing it down to the 17-40L, 100mm macro, and an 85 f/1.8 prime. I just need to decide which I would use more right now and if replacing the kit lens should be a high priority for me.

Thanks so much for the suggestions. I'm always open to more!

jpc



jpcampbell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2005, 11:32 AM   #7
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

I fail to understand the logic of only buying lenses with a rebate. They're not giving it away free, you still have to pay you're just getting a discount. The reason they're not discounting the 17-85 is that it's such a popular choice (with good reason) that they don't need to.

All that aside however, they are all good lenses. I'd go for the 17-40 L. If you're hell-bent on getting those rebates then the L is a good choice as a main lens for your camera.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2005, 11:55 AM   #8
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

i agree... the 17-40 would be on your cameraalot..
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 23, 2005, 11:58 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 7
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
I fail to understand the logic of only buying lenses with a rebate. They're not giving it away free, you still have to pay you're just getting a discount. The reason they're not discounting the 17-85 is that it's such a popular choice (with good reason) that they don't need to.
You are right to a point. If there is a non-rebate lens that fit my needs/wants and was $200 less than the ones on the list, then it would be a wash. The 17-85 is $550 on amazon. The 17-40L is brought down to that range (~$500 or so) after rebate. The % difference is more drastic with the other lenses I'm looking at.

I basically have a $200 off coupon to purchase a lens on the list. You are right, nothing is free, but if I can take advantage and get something nicer with the discount, why not?

jpc


jpcampbell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 24, 2005, 6:10 AM   #10
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

To me it would make sense to think about what kind of photography you want to do and make a short list of lenses and set yourself a budget.

Then check out the prices and adjust for any rebates or special offers or whatever.

But to start with a shopping list of "on sale" items is working backwards. Spending $500 on the wrong lens is daft regardless of whether it was on a rebate or not. Just because you can get something cheaply doesn't mean it's money well-spent.
peripatetic 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 9:30 PM.