Lens suggestion thread #3758

Red Bull

Well, Christmas is coming up, and that means gifts of money, which means money for camera accessories! I've been thinking about a new lens for my 20D, but I'm stuck. (Right now I only have the 18-55) I'd like to get a lens with more reach, and with that I'm considering the 70-200 f/4L. The highest price I would be ble to go to would be around $500. I figure I will probably be able to get a used 70-200 f/4L on here for around that price. I don't photograph anything in particular that I need to be closer, but there are times that the 200 end would be of great use.

On the other hand, I also love to do macro. For that I am considering the 100 f/2.8 macro. The only thing is, I'm not sure if that would be quite enough reach. I love the shaprness of it, though.

Another lens I am considering is the 28-135 IS. It seems like an excellent lens for walkaround, but I would much precer to have a single set minimum aperture instead of something like a 3.5-5.6.

- 70-200 f/4L
- 100 f/2.8 macro
- 28-135 IS

Does anybody have any suggestions for any other lenses? My budget would be aroud $500. I've looked at Sigma and Tamron, but none really appeal to me. Please help!

gluwater

Those are all popular lenses and you will probably be happy with any one you choose, but here is my .02.

I have the 70-200 2.8 IS and love it, I know you are looking at the f/4 and there are a lot of people on here that have that and love it also. Something to consider is that it is white, if you are going to want to take street shots with it be aware that you will have a spotlight on you and people are afraid of big white lenses.

100 f/2.8 Macro - This is one of my favorite lenses. The DOF is great for Macro and it is oh so sharp. It is also a good lens for things non-Macro here is a candid I took at a family party.

28-135 IS - This is a good walk around lens and the IS can help make up for the 3.5-5.6, but not fully. I am thinking of trading up to an L zoom to replace this but it has served me well.

Giving a little more info on what exactly you like to shoot may get you some info on aditional lenses because the three you have listed right now are kinda all over the board.

Red Bull

Thank you for your mini reviews. I like to shoot a variety of things, which is why it's so hard to choose a lens!

Red Bull

Anyone else with suggestions? Any help is helpful and greatly appreciated.

DJ-S1

I have the 70-200L f4 and it's great. The wide end is good for portraits on a 1.6 crop sensor, and the far end is ~320mm equivalent which is pretty good for sports, airshows, etc. A little short for birds, though. It is a big lens compared to what I'm used to, and you do get noticed when you've got it strapped on. I have people walk up to me all the time and ask about it.

If you are into faster lenses, consider the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 XR DI for a walkaround lens. It's a very good lens for the price. But on a 1.6x it isn't very wide; you'll have trouble with shots of buildings, etc, and end up putting the kit lens back on for those.

I haven't used the other lenses mentioned so that's about all the info I have for you. I'll be interested to see what you end up with and what you think of them.

gus

I would buy the 70-200 f/4 in a flash. No questions.

Bang for buck its about the best around !

Gus

Chase

a sigma 24-70 f2.8 is a fantastic lens. Its sharp and fast. What more could ya want? thumb

Red Bull

Thank you for the replies. One other thing I would like to know is how are the macro capabilities of the Tamron, Sigma, and Canon? I've seen some great macros from the 70-200, but I haven't seen any from the other 2 lenses mentioned. Does anybody have any examples?

DavidTO

Humungus wrote:

I would buy the 70-200 f/4 in a flash. No questions.

Bang for buck its about the best around !

Gus

Whoa.




Gus is right!

I love my 70-200 f4L, and I think it is one of the best values in L glass around.

Red Bull

I've been looking at examples on pbase.com and the results from the 70-200 look fantastic. I think I might go for it. Of course, I still do have some more time to think, but as of now I'm pretty set on the 70-200 f/4.

gus

Red Bull wrote:

I've been looking at examples on pbase.com and the results from the 70-200 look fantastic. I think I might go for it. Of course, I still do have some more time to think, but as of now I'm pretty set on the 70-200 f/4.

Worst case senario is you dont like it & offer it for sale again....there are always plenty of buyers around for this lens.

DanielB

Consider the Canon EF 75-300 II USM *don't remember the f-stop.*

it is the one i am considering and it is considerably cheaper. you can also get that in an IS version.

just a suggestion from a fellow shopper.

-daniel-

Red Bull

I've seen the 75-300 USM in person and it just doesn't appeal to me. I'd rather just spend the money and get a higher quality lens because I can see myself getting tired of it really quickly. Thank you for the suggestion, though.

gus

Old 0zzie farmers saying RB...

"..its only expensive if you have to buy it twice"

PeterGar

I'm in the same boat with my 300D I got last Christmas. I only own the kit EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens. I ocassionally rent the EF 28-70mm f/2.8L lens and love that, but can't afford it.

For Christmas, I'm hoping my wife buys me the Tamron SP AF28-75 f/2.8 Di LD Aspherical (IF) Macro lens. From the reviews I've read and people I'm chatted with here on Dgrin, this is a great lens for the price. The only problem I've heard is that there are some copies out there that are too soft at certain apertures and/or lengths. I hear Tamron is good about exchanging or calibrating these bad copies. Makes me feel uncomfortable about Tamron's quality control, but they do come with a 6 year warranty.

Anyhhow, that's my plan. I eventually want a 70-200mm lens too. I have my eyes on the Sigma, but the Canon IS would be ideal.

Thusie

Boy I'm very new to the DSLR world, but gonna wade in anyway:): I have the 28-135 IS, I like it.....BUT the lens I find I grab the most often, the one I enjoy the most, the one that I seem to get the best shots with (hand held and I seem to have very unsteady hands at times) is the 70-200 f4. Do I know how to use it? Nope, don't know how to use the camera either:D To my untrained eye, even with the IS on the one, the 70-200 is just tops

gluwater

Red Bull wrote:

Thank you for the replies. One other thing I would like to know is how are the macro capabilities of the Tamron, Sigma, and Canon? I've seen some great macros from the 70-200, but I haven't seen any from the other 2 lenses mentioned. Does anybody have any examples?

Just so you know the only TRUE Macro on your list is the 100 f/2.8 Macro. A true Macro will give you a 1:1 ratio, meaning what you are shooting will be at 100% size on the actual camera sensor.

Here is a Macro taken with the Canon 100 f/2.8.


The 70-200 has a minimum focusing distance of 3.9' so you will not be able to get shots this close with it.

Red Bull

Yes, I understand everything about the true macro lens. I was only referring to the other lens' minimum focusing range capability. I really want the 100 f/2.8 but I think right now I'd rather have the versatility of the 70-200 f/4L. I need more money!