advice for a good walk-around lens?
I will be buying a new canon 7D next week, i would ask for some advice for a general walk-around lens which would be on my camera for most of the time? i dont want to spend so much but right now I'm choosing between the 24-105mm f/4L IS USM or 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM...
i would want to ask for the pros and cons of each lens.. thank you :thumb
and maybe some more lens suggestions
i would want to ask for the pros and cons of each lens.. thank you :thumb
and maybe some more lens suggestions
Canon 7D, 450D, 50mm 1.8, 50mm 1.2, Mp-e 65mm, 70-200mm f/2.8L USM, 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM, Canon 100mm f/2.8L macro IS USM, 580exII, some sigma lenses:D
0
Comments
Tamron SP AF 17-50mm, f/2.8 XR DI-II LD Aspherical (IF) "and"
Canon EF 70-200mm, f/4L USM
Similar money to either of your 2 mentioned lenses, but much better total range and versatility.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
hmm.. i think thats gonna cost me too much..
Also, don't forget that you "need" a decent flash with AF assist. That makes a tremendous difference in indoor AF speed and accuracy, not to mention light quality and subsequent image quality. I recommend at least the Sigma EF 530 DG Super in Canon E-TTL II version.
The flash will make a more visible improvement to indoor photography than lens or camera (coupled with an appropriate flash modifier and technique, of course).
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I have both. Both have excellent image quality and IS, which I do find valuable. The lens hood on both is not included and costs extra.
24-105L
Pros:
Good telephoto range
Very solid, tight, professional build and feel
Cons:
f/4 often not fast enough in low light, but 7D high ISO and IS can help compensate
24mm just doesn't seem that wide on a crop sensor
17-55
Pros:
Nice wide end for small indoor rooms
f/2.8 is useful for indoors/low light, narrow DOF and portrait backgrounds
Versatile indoors and out as a walkaround lens; when I can only take one lens with me I take this one
Cons:
EF-S, so cannot be used with a full frame camera if you upgrade to that someday
Sucks up an alarming amount of dust inside it (does not affect image quality...usually), odd for a $1000 lens
Compared to the 24-105, feels flimsy, loose, kinda cheap...again, odd for a $1000 lens
55mm is kinda short, but the sheer number of megapixels on the 7D means you can crop and still have a lot of resolution left over
The zoom is not smooth when used for video
thank you for that... I'll think i'll just try them when i get there so i could really compare them.. And one more thing, i think i won't be upgrading to a FF camera..
Both are great lenses.
The main plus for 17-55 is the f/2.8.
The main plus for 24-105mm is a bit more tele. 24 would not be enough for me at the wide end on a crop camera, and I would need more range in the bag anyway. I think this is more of a lens for a FF camera.
Not sure why you want a 7D
Don't know why Ziggy recommends the Tamron over the Canon 17-55 which is normally his favourite. Worth checking out.
Probably for the best AF Canon has to offer in an "affordable" body.
True, but can be greatly reduced by the religious use of a good UV filter.
The only pro-grade single lens solution is obviously the 24-105L. If you can only afford one lens, that is it.
However 24 is often not wide enough on aps-c. And, you bought a $1700 camera, you will be able to afford a second lens in relatively short order. That said, an amazing combo is the 17-55/2.8IS and the 70-200/4LIS. Buy the 17-55 now, save up for the 70-200. I had that combo before I went FF, and I still have the 70-200/4. Only need I feel for the 70-200/2.8 is for indoor sports, concerts, and plays, which for now are rare for me.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
whats wrong with wanting the 7d? o.O
The Canon EF-S 17-55mm, f2.8 IS USM is still one of my favorite lenses. It's a matter of affordability. The Tamron SP AF 17-50mm, f/2.8 XR DI-II LD Aspherical (IF) "and" Canon EF 70-200mm, f/4L USM combined are a similar cost to the Canon 17-55mm, f2.8IS alone, and the Tamron is still a very nice optic.
Give me the range over IS any day. There is always the opportunity to upgrade later. Both lenses hold their value fairly well so upgrading would not be that costly, compared to the benefits of immediate ownership of a more flexible system now.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
for the money I would also pick that two lens combination - Tamron 17-50 and Canon 70-200 f/4L over the expensive Canon 17-55
The 15-85 or the 18-135 would both have a good range for a walk around lenses.
I don't have either lens ... yet.
For me, I think I'd go for the wider angle.
Link to the 15-85 at B&H.
Link to the 18-135 at B&H.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
You could get the Tamron with VC.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/652136-USA/Tamron_AFB005C700_SP_AF_17_50mm_f_2_8.html
With the rebates it is only about $150 more than the non-VC lens. It has quite nice optics and is a great alternative if you can't afford the 17-55mm.
I could get a canon 7D + 17-55mm 2.8 IS USM + a telephoto zoom lens
(canon ef 70-200mm f/4L IS USM or canon ef 70-200mm f/2.8 USM) which would be better among the two?
or maybe a canon 5d mk ii + 24-105mm L and the zoom
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:N7F3Zpuua_oJ:www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/pressrelease/20090901_eos7d.html+canon+7d+f2.8+dual+cross+type&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Go for 17-55! I miss mine so much ever since i've moved to full frame 3 years ago, that I am tempted to buy a 7D just to use this lens!
Nothing wrong with wanting a 7D.
I think good lenses are relatively more important than the body so when budget constrained I would choose the lenses and then see how much is left over for the body - so I wondered if there is a special reason for you wanting 7D above, say, 40D/50D.
Now it seems you have enough money for a dream combo 7D+17-55+70-200.
Your question on flash is a puzzle because it sounds like you are very new to the hobby. Of course you need flash, and a tripod, and an appropriate pc, and some decent post-processing software, a weatherproof bag, a sun cap for the 17-55, even a printer - the list is not complete even. Perhaps Davev's advice is best: get a single lens with a super range and a decent body. You'll have some money left over to ensure your whole system is tip-top while you learn what might be missing.
About davev's advice.. those are nice lenses but i think i want fast lenses with quality.. and from what I've read the 17-55mm is on of the best or even the best EF-s lens in terms of quality...
I got those stuff covered except for the flash and the post-processing software.... I think I'll go for ziggy's advice (sigma 530 super)
whats a good post-processing software?
The 70-200 2.8 IS *is* heavier than most other commonly used lenses...but I feel the weight is worth the image quality...and can't *wait* until I get the Mk2.
If you can afford both, get both.
The only reason I will suggest the 24-105 over the 24-70 2.8 is there is supposed to be an IS version of the 24-70 coming *soon*, so if you can wait, get the 24-105 in a kit if you can and sell the 24-105 and upgrade later.
As far as the 7D vs the 5D2...there are more discussions on that than I can count... Basically if you need the sports/etc features, go for the 7D...if you need the studio/landscape/etc features go for the 5D2. Get what works for you.
I'll be getting the 7D since i don't really shoot landscapes and i want sports and some portraits.. I will also getting the 17-55 2.8 is usm and 70-200 2.8 usm non-is
I use the EF-S 17-55 a lot - definitely a quality lens.
I use Aperture 3 for post. This is great package for Mac and costs around $200 I think. Other people use Lightroom which runs on Mac and PC. Ask on the darkroom board when you figure out what you want to achieve - there is a lot of choice from free packages to full Photoshop with 3D effects. You can start with the bundle Canon supply with the 7D which is their post equivalent of a good kit lens.
Sound like you chose a fantastic bundle. Enjoy.
Since I'm on PC I guess I'll be using lightroom and I think that's what most people also use? I'll just have to research on other choices
I would spend the time shooting with your fantastic kit rather than researching darkroom software further.
Lightroom is market leader in terms of volumes sold to serious amateurs and pros - not least because PC has a bigger share than Mac. Adobe also has a point to prove versus Apple so future updates will be coming and will be competitive. By all accounts it is great darkroom software and not far behind Apple