choices of buying a lens

nikgonenikgone Registered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
edited December 29, 2008 in Cameras
Hi Guys!

I currently own a 40D with 28-135.

I am going on a cruise to Alaska on the 2nd and going to taiwan on the 15th.

I mainly want to take pictures of the great landscape, but also the people as well, but it would be a great hassle to change lens very often. I was thinking of buying a ultra wide angle such as 10-22 or 10-20, but ya, switching sucks. Then I saw the new 18-200 lens, which sounds good for a lazy person like me, but the review on Dpreview isn't that great on that lens. Heavy Distortion and the chromatic aberration makes me unable to decide whether I should buy the 10-20 (10-22) or 18-200. Any suggestions guys?

Thx!

Comments

  • BeachBillBeachBill Registered Users Posts: 1,311 Major grins
    edited December 27, 2008
    Psst... I just posted my Sigma 18-200 for sale here.

    Speaking of dpreview, I saw this message comparing the Sigma to the Canon 18-200.
    Bill Gerrard Photography - Facebook - Interview - SmugRoom: Useful Tools for SmugMug
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,133 moderator
    edited December 27, 2008
    Super-zooms (what I call a 7x zoom range) and Ultra-zooms (10x range and above) are always a compromise design. As long as you are taking snapshots they serve their purpose well. If you want lenses that can do even moderate enlargements be prepared to see the compromises in the images. Simple images can often be helped with USM and other sharpening, but complicated images often cannot.

    My own travel kit consists of:

    Canon crop 1.6x camera
    Sigma 10-20mm, f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM
    Canon EF-S 17-55mm, f/2.8 IS USM
    Canon EF 70-200mm, f/4L IS USM
    Canon EF 50mm, f/1.4 USM
    Tamron 1.4x teleconverter
    Canon 1.4x teleconverter
    Close focus adapter, 3.3 diopter, to fit the 50mm, f/1.4, gives about 1/2 lifesize.
    Canon 500D, 77mm, 2 diopter lens with 67-77mm ring to fit 70-200mm, f/4L, gives almost 1:1 at MFD.

    Along with a couple of flashes this yields tremendous flexibility, with very high image quality, in about 15 lbs worth of payload in a single-strap "sling" type backpack.

    I generally also use a "camera holster" which holds my most used alternate lens (at the moment) to switch with whatever is on the camera. If you make it "easy" to switch lenses, you are more likely to switch as needed.

    While all zooms are compromised, compared to the best prime lenses, I feel that the collection in my travel kit involves acceptable and professional levels of quality for my style of shooting.

    If I have to choose just 2 lenses for a day-trip for instance, it is generally the Canon EF-S 17-55mm, f/2.8 IS USM and Canon EF 70-200mm, f/4L IS USM. If I need wider I can generally stitch multiple images at 17mm.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • nikgonenikgone Registered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited December 27, 2008
    ya...

    imagine you are walking on the street taking pictures of the scenery and suddenly you want to take pics of your friends. *change lens* then ohhhh you want to take some shots of another street *change lens*

    sigh....I wish I was rich enough to buy all the lenses and invent an auto-lens changer ^_^.


    just curious...should one buy an used 24-70L or new 17-55?
  • Moogle PepperMoogle Pepper Registered Users Posts: 2,950 Major grins
    edited December 27, 2008
    17-55.
    Food & Culture.
    www.tednghiem.com
  • Scott_QuierScott_Quier Registered Users Posts: 6,524 Major grins
    edited December 27, 2008
    17-55.
    15524779-Ti.gif - Makes a better "walk-around" lens. The 24-70 may not be wide enough in many situations and the IS of the 17-55 is hard to beat for indoor shots where light is limited and so is the movement of your subject.
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,133 moderator
    edited December 27, 2008
    nikgone wrote:
    ya...

    imagine you are walking on the street taking pictures of the scenery and suddenly you want to take pics of your friends. *change lens* then ohhhh you want to take some shots of another street *change lens*

    sigh....I wish I was rich enough to buy all the lenses and invent an auto-lens changer ^_^.


    ...

    I'm actually old enough to remember that zoom lenses were all pretty sad and you "wanted" to use primes as much as possible. I used a Pentax H1a which was screw mounted lenses and manual everything with no meter. I was actually able to take some pretty serious photos with that camera and I still have the body and lenses.

    It was also a film camera so every 24-36 exposures you had to load another film cassette.

    Later I bought a twin lens Mamiya C330 and it was still prime lenses that ruled, but the camera would switch lenses pretty easily. Film changes every 12-24 frames.

    Then I got a Hasselblad and its wonderful bayonet mounted lens system. Still primes, but now the changes were so much easier. The A12 film cartridge only held 120 size film so only 12 images before a change.

    At my previous employer's I used a 4" x 5" view camera for years and primes were mounted on "lens boards" and mounted on the camera according to required FOV. A ... film ... change ... with ... each ... exposure.

    It wasn't until I got a Canon AE1 Program that I finally bought a quality zoom, although it was a Vivitar brand.

    Anyway, the thought of chucking in a fresh lens now and again brings me no pain. It is such a blessing to use the tools that we have today, and I really don't want to go back to the "old days and old ways".

    There is also nothing wrong with having a second camera just for snapshots. I often carry a FujiFilm F30 P&S just for that purpose. Not every image has to be a masterpiece.
    nikgone wrote:
    ... just curious...should one buy an used 24-70L or new 17-55?

    On a crop 1.6x Canon camera the 17-55mm range is a more "standard" FOV and range than the 24-70mm, f2.8L, although if you really are about to get a full-frame body then the 24-70mm, f2.8L is a standard range for that camera and the 17-55mm does not fit full-frame or crop 1.3x cameras.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • nikgonenikgone Registered Users Posts: 22 Big grins
    edited December 27, 2008
    Don't think i'll ever change into a full frame...haha....

    17-55 sounds really good, although it doesn't look as hawt as 24-70L haha

    i haven't learned any PS or stitching stuff....so I was thinking of buy a 10-22 for the ultra wide...

    I'll look into the 17-55...

    thx guys
  • Tee WhyTee Why Registered Users Posts: 2,390 Major grins
    edited December 28, 2008
    Canon 17-55 or a Tamron 17-50mm which is cheaper may be a good compromise, wide enough for landscape, but not as wide as ultrawides with 10mm wides and not long as the 28-135, but not bad at 50mm or so.

    Another option is a Sigma 17-70mm.

    I personally think those 18-200mm ish zooms make too much compromise in terms of image quality and lens speed for convenience.
  • TristanPTristanP Registered Users Posts: 1,107 Major grins
    edited December 29, 2008
    Hard to beat the 10-22 for landscapes. Matches well with your 28-135. Changing lenses ain't bad. Just take a sensor cleaning kit along with you in case things gets really yucky. Or rent a body from lensrentals.com (or similar) for your "other" lens.
    panekfamily.smugmug.com (personal)
    tristansphotography.com (motorsports)

    Canon 20D | 10-22 | 17-85 IS | 50/1.4 | 70-300 IS | 100/2.8 macro
    Sony F717 | Hoya R72
Sign In or Register to comment.