Min # of lens for greatest range and quality

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

10/28/2006 09:19:38 PM · #1

Money is a semi-concern, but I want to buy the best lenses, and only buy them once for years to come. Maybe sell some of the old ones, or keep for backup.

I've been renting the 70-200 f/2.8 for the past 3 weekends ($45 a pop). Maybe I should just buy it so I know it will be available. It works really well for sports pics, although I do miss the 300mm range.

CURRENT BAG:
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 IS USM (used)
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
Tamron SP AF 20-40mm f/2.7-3.5 Aspherical IF for Canon
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II
Kenko 2x teleconverter

BUY: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM to replace 75-300
BUY: EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM to replace 18-55

My main concern is missing shots because of not enough light. I mostly take pictures of bands in low-light situations or sports in harsh light. I hope to move into mobile portrait work. I also have a Turkish dance festival (of all things) coming up and do not know what lighting conditions to expect.

wavelength

Nikon D300

10/28/2006 09:29:14 PM · #2

If you're doing low light (as you said) then f/2.8 is a no brainer.

alfresco

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

10/28/2006 09:36:09 PM · #3

low light, big glass.

JP likes his uber-wide 12-24 too - just as a teaser for you.

dwterry

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

10/28/2006 10:10:38 PM · #4

My two most used lenses:

Canon 24-70 2.8L
Canon 70-200 2.8L IS

On the 5D, these two are just about perfect. On the 350D, you might want to consider getting the Canon 10-22 as well, just so that you can go wide angle.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

10/28/2006 10:11:05 PM · #5

Bear in mind that the highly regarded Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and Sigma EX 70-200 f/2.8 are $1510 cheaper than the two lenses you're looking at. The Sigma isn't stabilized, but that won't help much anyway with moving subjects in low light, and you could get additional lenses and/or a 30D body for the difference. Both lenses are superior to any in your current collection.

Message edited by author 2006-10-28 22:12:03.

PhantomEWO

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

10/28/2006 10:14:29 PM · #6

I use almost exclusively two lenses out of the 5 I own. They are the Canon 70-200 f/4L and the Sigma 24-70 EX DG Macro. Very seldom do I feel the need for anything else. Both are very shard and have given me no problems at all.

Before I got the Sigma I test shot it against the equivalent Canon. Over all with inside, outside, various zooms and closeup the Sigma performed better on 75% or more of the shots and I saved over $500.

Best of luck

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

10/28/2006 10:41:38 PM · #7

Most used lenses I own are the 24-105, the 85, the 70-200 in that order. Honestlty I wish I hadn't bought the 70-200 and at some point here I will likely sell it. It's fine for what it is, but what it isn't is a 300mm lense and I find that more often than not it's not what I need when I need long reach.

Like you, I had a 300mm zoom at one time...

C-Fox

Canon EOS-20D

10/29/2006 12:44:15 AM · #8

Originally posted by dwterry:

These are what I would recomend as well as the 50mm (which you already have).

cpanaioti

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

10/29/2006 01:21:44 AM · #9

Originally posted by dwterry:

Except that the 10-22 is an EF-S lens which doesn't fit the 5D. The 17-40 is great at full frame though not 2.8. For 2.8 there's the 16-35.

Telehubbie

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

10/29/2006 01:42:02 AM · #10

Originally posted by cpanaioti:

Except that the 10-22 is an EF-S lens which doesn't fit the 5D.

I think he was referring to the 350D which is what the OP has.

Originally posted by dwterry:

On the 350D, you might want to consider getting the Canon 10-22 as well, just so that you can go wide angle.

Message edited by author 2006-10-29 01:44:49.

Ennil

Nikon D200

10/29/2006 01:38:25 AM · #11

Weee Turkish dances. If they start stepping the horon you have to join in.

I say 24-70 or 16-35. The 10-22 would be great on the 350D but if you decide to upgrade it would be too much of a loss.

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

10/29/2006 06:29:17 AM · #12

The 10-22 is only a loss if you upgrade to full frame, and even then I'm sure you could sell it. I just got that one and am quite glad I did!

originalism

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

10/29/2006 06:59:56 AM · #13

Well I am not a big fan of the 10-22mm. I guess it's horses for courses and as ever it has to be all about what pictures you like to take.
Personally I used to use my Canon 17-40mm L Series for absolutely everything, then I got the (newish) Sigma 30mm and I have to say that either I was very lucky and got the sharpest lens ever, or it's just a fantastic piece of kit. Wildlife shots I use my 100-400mm which is fantastic too.

I don't think you can overestimate the value of a good prime though. So after all that waffle, I'd suggest the Sigma 30mm, the 17-40mm too and a dedicated telephoto if you have a use for it. I've heard good things about the 1.4x extender too: on your 70-200 that will take you up to 280mm (but avoid the 2x unit).

Mick

Canon EOS-5D

10/29/2006 08:02:31 AM · #14

These are the lenses you need, especially the big white one in the back.

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

10/29/2006 09:26:44 AM · #15

Originally posted by Mick:

These are the lenses you need, especially the big white one in the back.

idnic

Canon EOS-60D

10/29/2006 09:28:06 AM · #16

LMAO I'll take 2 sets to go please.

Bugzeye

Fisher Price Kid-Tough Digital

10/29/2006 09:34:40 AM · #17

someone give me all those lenses and I will buy a canon body. lol

kyebosh

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 80-200 f/2.8L

10/29/2006 09:47:35 AM · #18

on a crop sensor i'd suggest(expensife left cheaper right):

10-22 canon EF-S or Tokina 12-24

24-70L 2.8 or tamron 28-75

70-200L 2.8 IS or Sigma 70-200ex 2.8

That gives really good coverage with pretty darn good image quality.

jaredldr

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

10/29/2006 09:50:23 AM · #19

Originally posted by routerguy666:

Most used lenses I own are the 24-105, the 85, the 70-200 in that order...

The 85mm 1.8 (or 1.2 ... dreaming) is high on my list to buy for low light work.

Comes out to a 136 mm on a 20/30D and is fine for full frame if/when you upgrade.

Mick

Canon EOS-5D

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM for Canon

10/29/2006 04:18:10 PM · #20

Of course, you'll also need one of these. Unfortunately, Canon isn't going to release it until some time next month. For a measly $14K a pop, you may want to buy two.

Canon EF 600mm f/2.8L IS USM

Keith Maniac

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

10/29/2006 04:27:14 PM · #21

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Canon 17-55mm EF-S f/2.8 IS USM. It would be a better replacement for your kit lens than the Canon 24-70mm. And it has IS, which couldn't hurt for those low light situations.

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

10/29/2006 04:58:54 PM · #22

Originally posted by Mick:

Of course, you'll also need one of these. Unfortunately, Canon isn't going to release it until some time next month. For a measly $14K a pop, you may want to buy two.

Canon EF 600mm f/2.8L IS USM

Where did you see that a 600mm f/2.8 is soon to be released?

cresus

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

10/30/2006 11:41:40 AM · #23

Originally posted by Keith Maniac:

I was about to recommend the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 instead of the Canon since it's a great lens at 1/3 the price. I figured though that the OP was willing to fork out the money for the L's so price didn't seem to be an issue.

ct_lane