If you start all over again, which lens combo would you pick?

[95bcwh]

All,
I realized that there's already plenty of threads asking for lens suggestion, but I didn't want to hijack those threads. I started one because I kind of know what type of photos I'll be shooting.

My aim is to cover the range from as low as possible to 200mm. I am going to get a digital SLR so I'll have 1.6 crop issue. This is how I intend to use the following range:

< 24 mm : - Mainly landscape, I don't think I need large aparture for this, because I normally like large depth of field when I shoot landscape. So I'm happy with lens with f number from 4 onwards. But which one should I go for? I'm tempted to go for EFS lens because they're cheaper and they go as low as 10-22mm, but a little anxious about quality. The prime lens are expensive in this focal length.

24-70mm: Mainly for everyday shooting and Portrait, people, party, life. Here I will like to have big aparture because I like to have nice bokeh in this range. I'm almost sold on the 24-70mm f/2.8L USM, but I'm a disappointed that it's not an IS lens, and it's quite heavy. Should I wait for Canon to come up with an IS version? The other option I'm thinking of is to get prime lens 24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4USM, 85mm f/2.8USM to cover the range, at the same time get a EFS 17-85mm f/4.0-5.6 IS USM for casual shooting. Now, these prime lens are not IS either. I like to do a lot of post-processing job so I really don't have to use zoom lens to get my framing right when I shoot the picture because I can always crop the picture later on.

70-200mm: I am almost sold on the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. But for this range, I will be mainly shooting portrait. Also, I will be shooting Macro, so I already thinking of getting a 100mm f/2.8L Macro USM. Does anyone know how the two lens compare when taking portraits at 100mm f/2.8L. If the Macro lens is just as good, I may postpone buying the 70-200mm because it's so heavy and bulky.

Budget wise, I will like my combo to end up less than S$7000

Thanks for all your help and suggestion.

barry

[raptor84]

For landscape work(24<) you can stick with the kit lens as you will problably be stopping fown to f/8 or lower on a tripod.

The 24-70 range is defianly best covered by canon's L given your budget. If you wanna save more you can find those third party variants like the sigma 24-70 or tamron 28-75. Both focus slower but optically are almost on par. They cost slightly less than helf the price too.

70-200. If you want to shoot macro more then use the 100mm macro. If not get the best 70-200 you can afford . Given your bedget you can easily afford a 2.8IS and a 24-70 L

[Isaiahfortythirtyone]

landscape - tokina 12-24mm f/4

mid range - tamron 28-75mm or sigma 24-60 (optically superior to sigma 24-70)

tele - canon 70-200L

Macro - sigma 105 f/2.8

portrait prime - 85/1.8

[NightZ88]

with dat budget, dere's quite a no. of lens u can get.. if i had dere, tis is wat i wld haf chosen.
taking into consideration dat i dun shoot under low light..
portraits: 50 f1.4 / 135 f2
wideangle: 10-22 f3.5-4.5
walkarnd lens: 24-105 f4L IS
tele: 100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS
macro: tamron 90mm f2.8

[clicknick]

Don't know about the combo, but I like your BUDGET

[Gunbucker]

For the mid range focal lengths, I feel a zoom (such as the 24-70) would serve better than multiple primes.

That said, if I had to start all over again, I will still stick with my three amigos:
+ 17-40mm f/4
+ 24-70mm f/2.8
+ 70-200mm f/2.8 IS

... and a very good friend called 580EX, that's about it.

[nickmak]

If you wanna save some money on a 70-200L, I suggest the non-IS version or the f4L, as both of them are extremely good.

Cheers,
Nick

[jsbn]

Start all over?

- EOS 5D
- 17-40L
- 28-105L

That's it.

[calebk]

Originally Posted by 95bcwh All, I realized that there's already plenty of threads asking for lens suggestion, but I didn't want to hijack those threads. I started one because I kind of know what type of photos I'll be shooting. My aim is to cover the range from as low as possible to 200mm. I am going to get a digital SLR so I'll have 1.6 crop issue. This is how I intend to use the following range: < 24 mm : - Mainly landscape, I don't think I need large aparture for this, because I normally like large depth of field when I shoot landscape. So I'm happy with lens with f number from 4 onwards. But which one should I go for? I'm tempted to go for EFS lens because they're cheaper and they go as low as 10-22mm, but a little anxious about quality. The prime lens are expensive in this focal length. 24-70mm: Mainly for everyday shooting and Portrait, people, party, life. Here I will like to have big aparture because I like to have nice bokeh in this range. I'm almost sold on the 24-70mm f/2.8L USM, but I'm a disappointed that it's not an IS lens, and it's quite heavy. Should I wait for Canon to come up with an IS version? The other option I'm thinking of is to get prime lens 24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4USM, 85mm f/2.8USM to cover the range, at the same time get a EFS 17-85mm f/4.0-5.6 IS USM for casual shooting. Now, these prime lens are not IS either. I like to do a lot of post-processing job so I really don't have to use zoom lens to get my framing right when I shoot the picture because I can always crop the picture later on. 70-200mm: I am almost sold on the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. But for this range, I will be mainly shooting portrait. Also, I will be shooting Macro, so I already thinking of getting a 100mm f/2.8L Macro USM. Does anyone know how the two lens compare when taking portraits at 100mm f/2.8L. If the Macro lens is just as good, I may postpone buying the 70-200mm because it's so heavy and bulky. Budget wise, I will like my combo to end up less than S$7000 Thanks for all your help and suggestion. barry

We know you have 1.6x crop, so you'll probably need something wider than 24/28mm to shoot WA. Whether you are going full-frame in the future also comes into play. If you are, then the EF 17-40L may actually be a better choice. Good optics, weather sealing, good build. If full-frame isn't/won't be an option to you, then by all means go for the EF-S 10-22mm. It's built well, and performs well too. Good, fast AF, solidly built (plus it shares 77mm filters with your 24-70, should you choose to get it).

Why do you need IS on a standard zoom lens? 24-70L is a very good lens. If you need IS on a standard zoom, maybe you need to improve your handholding technique (no offence). Alternatively, if you want a little more reach, in exchange for one stop less light, the 24-105 f/4L is also another excellent lens. Really, at Canon you're spoilt for choice with the range of standard zooms. Again, if full-frame isn't going to be an issue for you, the 17-55 f/2.8 is an L in disguise in the EF-S range. If you get the 17-55, you may not need a wide angle lens, as this lens is a great walkabout (many users have plenty of good reviews for this lens).

Do you need the f/2.8 for your tele lens? Will you be doing low light work? If not, the f/4L IS version would be better (and cheaper! ). It has the newest IS technology from Canon that allows for shooting 4-stops below hand-holding ranges (going by the 1/focal length rule, so for example, 1/200 at the 200mm end is the normal handholding shutter speed. You can drop up to four stops below that and get a clear shot.)

Just my (very long) two cents.

[95bcwh]

Thank you all for commenting.. some have brought up ideas that I've never thought of..looks like I have something thinking to do..

[Splutter]

Start all over...hmmm
5D
16-35 f2.8
24-70 f2.8
35 f1.4
50 f1.4
85 f1.2
135 f2

All these enough for me liao

For your budget, you can actually get a 5D + 24-105 f4 liao. Almost cover everything apart from the more tele end.

[megaweb]

1.6 DSLR
- EFS 10-22mm
- EFS 17-55mm f2.8
- EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS
- 500D
- 3rd party extension tubes

[Adam Goi]

Simple ... just a compact digital camera ...

[srisaro]

I your budget !

[Hacker]

Some suggestions:

16-35 f2.8
24 f1.4
35 f1.4
50 f1.2
85 f1.2
135 f2
180 f1.8 or 70-200 f2.8 IS

[midicity]

EFS 10-22mm
EFS 17-55 F2.8 IS
EF 70-200 F2.8 IS USM
Tamron 90mm Macro

[95bcwh]

I saw few suggestions on Tamron 90mm Macro. I know that it's a very good lens. But I have access to the US market at the moment where Canon offers doube rebate promotion so I can get a Canon 100mm Macro for about Singapore Dollor $638, is this going to be a good price?

Regarding EF-S 17-55mm, I have also been checking fremiranda.com website and found that many people complaining about the dust issues. Do you guys who owns this lens faced similar problem? Other than that, most people agree that this lens produce stunning image.

[spartacus.ret]

Originally Posted by 95bcwh I saw few suggestions on Tamron 90mm Macro. I know that it's a very good lens. But I have access to the US market at the moment where Canon offers doube rebate promotion so I can get a Canon 100mm Macro for about Singapore Dollor $638, is this going to be a good price?

superb price. you'll never find this kind of price in singapore. even second hand market, the ef 100mm f/2.8 runs for about $800, lowest $750.

[user111]

http://www.photorepetto.com/Digital/...ON%20Mr....jpg

best setup ever

[Ramius75]

Originally Posted by user111 http://www.photorepetto.com/Digital/...ON%20Mr....jpg best setup ever

heavy. and why is he using nikon strap on canon camera ??