| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/25/2006 01:02:11 AM · #1 |
I have the following lenses:
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Macro Super II for Canon
Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon
I'm thinking of selling the Canon EF-S 17-85mm and possibly the Sigma 70-300mm. I've been looking at the Canon 70-200 f/4 L and the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 but am having a hard time making up my mind what to do.
Of the lenses listed, which would you sell and what would you replace it with? |
|
|
|
03/25/2006 02:38:13 AM · #2 |
Hard to say, Bob, but I'll have a go at it. I agree that the 17-85 should be the first to go, and probably the Sigma 70-300 since you are thinking along those lines.
Do you favor primes? (I notice you currently own both the 50/1.8 and 100/2.0) Maybe consider adding the Canon 200/2.8L II USM, along with the Canon 1.4 teleconverter. Maybe a long prime macro to replace the Sigma Macro? This Canon 180/3.5L Macro USM is pricey but would do double duty in lieu of the 200/2.0 as both a top-quality macro and medium telephoto.
Or the Canon 70-200/4.0 you are considering is a great mid-range zoom. It's a bit cheaper than the prime/tc combo, more convenient being a zoom and all, but slightly heavier and not as fast.
If you want even more reach, either the
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM Zoom Lens or
Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Prime are obvious candidates.
All this you already know! If it were me, I would probably buy the 100-400/5.6 zoom: great focal range, lots of reach for photographing wildlife (something I especially enjoy), and it fits into your lens lineup nicely, more than replacing the Sigma zoom if you were to sell it.
Only you can decide... have fun with the new glass :D
Message edited by author 2006-03-25 03:08:46. |
|
|
|
03/26/2006 10:12:20 AM · #3 |
Yeah, I'm with nova.
I'd say that the 100mm f/2.0 is a possible candidate for the slightly slower, yet possibly more versatile 100mm f/2.8 Macro which is also a fantastic peice of glass. That f/2.0 is pretty yummy though. And you might not use the macro that much... There are also other ways of getting your macro fix that don't necessarily involve the 100mm. If it were me, I wouldn't switch.
Another thing you might consider is switching from the Sigma 70-300 to the 70-200, but for only a couple hundred dollars more you could go Canon L f/2.8... Tough choice there.
That 100-400mm is a serious choice in there, but it's a big sucker. And I mean BIG. Not a great choice if you like to handhold for different events.
If you wanted to move up, you could also consider sliding up a notch on the 50mm to the f/1.4 option which is still a fairly inexpensive lens. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/23/2025 01:16:54 PM EDT.
