DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Two lenses
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 36, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 10/12/2005 09:51:28 AM · #1
Suppose you had a 20D body and $2,000 to spend on lenses.
Which lenses would you buy?
 10/12/2005 09:54:30 AM · #2
The 70-200/2.8L IS and the 85/1.8. But it depends on what you want to shoot. I shoot a lot of portraiture and longer lens are are a must to avoid distorting the subject's features.
 10/12/2005 09:56:48 AM · #3
70-200 2.8 and a 16-35 2.8 it might run a little over 2k but thats your best bet. oh and get a 50 mm 1.8 for 100$ more.
 10/12/2005 09:57:14 AM · #4
i'd probably buy the 70-200 2.8L like eddy suggested.
and then maybe the 17-40mm f/4L USM
 10/12/2005 09:58:11 AM · #5
I would buy a used 70-200 f/2.8LU and a used 16-35 f/2.8LU...depending on what you shoot, of course.

Message edited by author 2005-10-12 09:58:25.
 10/12/2005 10:03:56 AM · #6
Originally posted by EddyG:
The 70-200/2.8L IS and the 85/1.8. But it depends on what you want to shoot. I shoot a lot of portraiture and longer lens are are a must to avoid distorting the subject's features.


Well ... I probably need to change my country of residence.
At today's xchg rate, the Canon EF 70-200mm F2,8 L USM IS costs $2,528
and Canon EF 85mm F1,8 USM is $536, putting me way beyond the budget.

Canon EF 16-35mm F2,8 L USM CPS: $2,107
Canon EF 50mm F1,8 II: $137

No, definitely a wrong country. :-(
10/12/2005 10:07:28 AM · #7
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
I would buy a used 70-200 f/2.8LU and a used 16-35 f/2.8LU...depending on what you shoot, of course.


I shoot everything that catches the eye. Life would be much simpler if I were able to narrow down my areas of interest. :-)
Otherwise, your recommendations seems like a very good one.

Btw - what about Tamrons and Sigmas?
 10/12/2005 10:10:49 AM · #8
Bummer about the exchange rate.

The biggest piece of advice I can give you is to invest wisely in your glass. Camera bodies will come and go, but good lenses will last for years.

Good lenses + cheap body = good pictures
Good body + cheap lenses = bad pictures

I personally made the decision a long time ago to not buy anything slower than an ƒ/2.8 lens, and I think that's been a wise decision.
 10/12/2005 10:12:51 AM · #9
Originally posted by Didymus:
Btw - what about Tamrons and Sigmas?


I can't say, I've never used them but I consistently hear Canon being praised over those two brands. I'd rather buy used Canon glass than new Sigma, but many people feel the complete opposite.

I have yet to buy new glass (or cameras, flash, filters, portable storage and camera bag for that matter) and all of the glass and equipment has treated me extremely well...80-200, 16-35, 50, 1.4TC and now 70-200.

Now that I think of it, literally the only piece of camera equipment I purchased new was my tripod and 1GB CF card...I've saved thousands of dollars by buying smart.

Message edited by author 2005-10-12 10:13:35.
 10/12/2005 10:14:27 AM · #10
The Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and Canon 70-200 f/4L should be well within your budget even with the exchange rate. Throw in a Canon 50mm f/1.8 and you've got my favorite three lenses. You may have enough left over for a Canon 1.4x teleconverter and/or Kenko extension tube for even more versatility.

Oh, and if you'd like a single all-around lens, the new Canon 24-105 f/4L IS has received great reviews.

Message edited by author 2005-10-12 10:15:40.
 10/12/2005 10:21:03 AM · #11
Originally posted by scalvert:
The Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and Canon 70-200 f/4L should be well within your budget even with the exchange rate. Throw in a Canon 50mm f/1.8 and you've got my favorite three lenses. You may have enough left over for a Canon 1.4x teleconverter and/or Kenko extension tube for even more versatility.

Oh, and if you'd like a single all-around lens, the new Canon 24-105 f/4L IS has received great reviews.


Canon EF 70-200mm F4,0 L USM: $919
Tamron AF 28-75mm F2,8 XR DI: $497
Canon EF 50mm F1,8 II: $137
----------------------------------
Total: $1,553

Now there's a good budget! :-)
 10/12/2005 10:32:34 AM · #12
Originally posted by Didymus:
Originally posted by scalvert:
The Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and Canon 70-200 f/4L should be well within your budget even with the exchange rate. Throw in a Canon 50mm f/1.8 and you've got my favorite three lenses. You may have enough left over for a Canon 1.4x teleconverter and/or Kenko extension tube for even more versatility.

Oh, and if you'd like a single all-around lens, the new Canon 24-105 f/4L IS has received great reviews.


Canon EF 70-200mm F4,0 L USM: $919
Tamron AF 28-75mm F2,8 XR DI: $497
Canon EF 50mm F1,8 II: $137
----------------------------------
Total: $1,553

Now there's a good budget! :-)


Or you could get Scalvert's Canon 17-40mm f/4L instead of the Tamron for wider angle shots....
 10/12/2005 10:42:48 AM · #13
Originally posted by Didymus:
Canon EF 70-200mm F4,0 L USM: $919
Tamron AF 28-75mm F2,8 XR DI: $497


Note these two lenses both use 67mm filters, so you can swap an expensive circular polarizer or other filter between them.
 10/12/2005 10:47:29 AM · #14
Scalvert said the same thing I was going to say, except I was going to suggest that you go with the 70-200 f2.8 non-IS if possible. The aperture jump does make a difference, particularly when you want to use the 1.4xTC (don't touch the 2x).

Another vote from all the people I have asked about the Tamron 28-75 f2.8. I'd get the 50mm last, to give your wallet a break.

You might look around for the 70-200 in your local second hand market. My roommate picked one up in Vancouver a few years ago for a thousand Canadian dollars and there's one in the (only) second hand shop here in Taipei for about a thousand US. L series glass stays good for a long long time. Second hand is a wise choice there.

Looks like you do still have a little bit of room in your budget.

Edit: Oh yeah, and what country are you in? Your profile doesn't mention it. I just did rough math in my head.

Message edited by author 2005-10-12 10:48:29.
 10/12/2005 10:53:58 AM · #15
Wow, is the Tamron 28-75 that good? Would you guys say it's L-quality and build? If so, I might have to pick one up...

10/12/2005 10:56:21 AM · #16
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Wow, is the Tamron 28-75 that good? Would you guys say it's L-quality and build?


The optics are L quality. The build is not (it's not sealed, and doesn't focus as quickly as an L lens with USM motor). On the other hand, it IS a third of the price...
 10/12/2005 12:05:29 PM · #17
Are you considering buying a 20D?
 10/12/2005 12:12:48 PM · #18
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Wow, is the Tamron 28-75 that good? Would you guys say it's L-quality and build? If so, I might have to pick one up...


Optics are simply first-rate. Build quality is exceptionally nice, but it's not L-quality.

Robt.
 10/12/2005 02:44:39 PM · #19
Originally posted by Didymus:
Btw - what about Tamrons and Sigmas?


I own two Tamrons and one Sigma (and a Sigma teleconverter). And I'm here to say that both brands are just like Canon. They make some less expensive lenses that are of moderate quality, and they make some more expensive lenses that are excellent. To generalize that any one brand of lens is better than others is shortsighted. Price is a better indicater than brand but even here there are notable exceptions like the Canon 50mm f1.8 and the Tamron 28-75 f2.8.

As an alternative to the Canon 70-200 f4 I would offer the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX. It will get you the faster aperture of the Canon 70-200 f2.8 without paying the premium price that the L label commands. It's build quality and optics are top notch.

Message edited by author 2005-10-12 14:46:13.
 10/12/2005 02:52:00 PM · #20
Originally posted by Didymus:
Suppose you had a 20D body....

Oh that would be fantastic.
Everyone would have their hands all over me, fondling me, admiring me...
10/12/2005 02:53:16 PM · #21
keep an eye on some the new tokina lenses too! They have been getting excellent reviews especially the 12-24 and the 100 macro
 10/12/2005 03:02:29 PM · #22
On the 20D a 2.8 lens will allow more accurate focusing (the camera has extra sensors that only work with 2.8 glass attached).

If you don't mind APS sized glass, Sigma has a 18-50 2.8 EX DC is that is as good (optically) as the canon 17-40 4L for less cash.

The Sigma 70-200 2.8 is also very good.

You did not mention if you want or care about macro capabilities? For most of the 60-100 lenses you'll spend $400 US or more. Extension tubes work nearly as well and can be used on many lenses.

Do you want ultra-wide? Perhaps go for a lesser tele (the sigma 70-300 4-5.6 APO DG Super II Macro is VG for the price) and get a 12-24 or 10-22 or even a prime in that area.

Perhaps you'd prefer another walkaround - the canon 24-105 or one fo the 18-200 ones that are out there (not the best at all ranges, but the oveall range is certainly useful and tempting).

If it were me...I have the Sigma 18-50 2.8 and love it. I also have the canon 50 1.8. I would like the sigma 70-200 2.8 as my next lens I think, and a 100mm or so macro would be nice, but no time soon.
 10/12/2005 03:05:06 PM · #23
The only REAL problem with aftermarket lenses is their autofocus capability. Although Nikon, Canon, etc sell their license to other manufacturers to enable proper hookup, they do not sell their proprietary autofocus technology which is so much superior in speed and accuracy. If you are in the photojournalistic end of photography, then high speed, accurate focus is a necessity, so stay away from aftermarket. Otherwise the top aftermarket brands, i.e. Sigma, Tokina, and Tamron have extremely good glass and produce very sharp images and consequently can save you major $$$ for all you portrait and still life photographers.
 10/12/2005 03:17:46 PM · #24
I agree...no third party for me, its way too slow! I think image sharpness debates are overrated, obviously there is a noticeable difference between some glass, but some are just making a case for something almost non existent.
 10/12/2005 04:20:06 PM · #25
Originally posted by slindenman:
The only REAL problem with aftermarket lenses is their autofocus capability. Although Nikon, Canon, etc sell their license to other manufacturers to enable proper hookup, they do not sell their proprietary autofocus technology which is so much superior in speed and accuracy. If you are in the photojournalistic end of photography, then high speed, accurate focus is a necessity, so stay away from aftermarket. ...

That's an entirely new notion to me. I thought that the autofocus technology was resident in the camera and only needed compatibility in the electrical connections to send signals to the lens to set the aperture, and to the lens' motor for focusing. I have read that Sigma's HSM is equal (or nearly so) to Canon's USM. Can you please expand on your theory for us.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 09:45:04 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 09:45:04 AM EDT.