Canon 20D lens advice

Head in the Clouds · June 12, 2006

:scratch I'm looking at purchasing a 20D in the near future (still searching for the 'right price') and would love to get all my lenses etc asap (hopefully budget will stretch ....) I want a decent wide angle, and 'normal' lens and hopefully a pretty good telephoto lens.

20D's generally come with the 18-55 kit lens, so there's the 'normal' covered.

Does the 10-22 wide angle seem ok? - too wide? not wide enough? (I want to do nice landscapes and a few interior shots)

And what do I do about telephoto? I've heard not to bother with a 70-300 kind of thing .. but what else? I want to get a few nice bird shots, boat shots etc ....

PS: I'm not really up there with the whole f. stuff .. as far as I can tell the smaller the number (ie 10-22) the wider the lens, bigger number (ie:70-300) the longer (or more telephoto-ish) the lens .... ?! correct me if I'm wrong :scratch

Seems from ebay that a decent telephoto will set me back about $2K, so maybe that will have to wait a little while ......

Any advice on lens choice much appreciated ....

Manfr3d · June 12, 2006

If I understand correctly, you are just starting with
photography.

If you're not into this i-want-to-own-the-most-expensive-
glass-to-feel-and-look-cool-thing like many ppl do that you
will meet in online discussions, i'd say:

The Sigma 10-20mm/4-5.6 is a very good lens and
doesnt cost a fortune. The same goes for the Canon
70-300mm/4.5-5.6 IS and the Tamron 28-75mm/2.8 SP.

They all perform very good and dont break the bank.

Some will now argue that for a hundred more you can
get a Canon 17-40mm/4.0 L or a Canon 70-200mm/4.0 L.
True, but at every level there will be sth "better" for
a few hundred bucks more.

just my 2 cents

Osprey Whisperer · June 12, 2006

One of the best lenses going and probably one of the best values (not cheap..but considering it's quality and price) on the planet IMHO is the Canon 200mm f/2.8 USM II "L". It's not a super long telephoto, but will get you some nice sports and wildlife shots. The fast speed and image quality can't be beat for 4x that price. If you need more reach...this lens works very well with the Canon 1.4x teleconverter. I shoot the majority of my shots with this lens. It cost me $500 used with a B&W filter included. It was like new and works like a charm. Not only is this lens sharp..it's got great color, contrast and buttery bokeh. The AF is really quite and super fast as well. If you think you are serious about your photography this is a lens everyone (you) should have in their/your bag. They don't really come any sharper or with better bokeh. (hops off soap box)

Another pretty nice lens for the $$$ is Canon's 85mm f/1.8 USM. Very sharp also..not an "L" but still not bad build quality. Nice lens speed as well which will help indoor shots (avoiding flash) Works well for friendly wildlife and portrait work. THe price is pretty nice also at just over $300 new and even better used.

For a super wide you might look into the Tokina 17mm f/3.5 ATX Pro ..another $300 ish lens or Tokina's 12-24mm f/4 ATX Pro DX around $500 new. Much cheaper than Canon's equivs. AF speed is a bit slower than the Canon's...but you will probably be shooting mostly landscapes/architecture with these.

There are other nice choices from Sigma and Tameron if you look at the reviews.

Have fun buy glass but be careful..it's very addicting.

Blue Snapshots · June 12, 2006

My recommendations?
Use the "kit" lens for awhile. Don't buy any new lenses. Learn the camera first and then (hopefully) determine what you may want for lenses.

For me, everytime I change the lens I'm changing the "camera" and if you buy the 20D with a few lenses right out of the gate you may get frustrated. Once you learn the camera then you can learn a new lens or two. And yes, you will have to "learn" a lens.

So wait. Be patient grasshopper. Wax On. Wax Off. Wax On. Wax Off.

:

marlinspike · June 12, 2006

I too recommend just using the kit lens for a while and seeing what you want different and going from there.
Also, it looks like nobody explained f-stop. The lower the number, the faster the lens, aka the more light it lets in.

Jeffro · June 12, 2006

Head in the Clouds wrote:

I'm looking at purchasing a 20D in the near future (still searching for the 'right price') and would love to get all my lenses etc asap (hopefully budget will stretch ....) I want a decent wide angle, and 'normal' lens and hopefully a pretty good telephoto lens.

20D's generally come with the 18-55 kit lens, so there's the 'normal' covered.

Does the 10-22 wide angle seem ok? - too wide? not wide enough? (I want to do nice landscapes and a few interior shots)

And what do I do about telephoto? I've heard not to bother with a 70-300 kind of thing .. but what else? I want to get a few nice bird shots, boat shots etc ....

PS: I'm not really up there with the whole f. stuff .. as far as I can tell the smaller the number (ie 10-22) the wider the lens, bigger number (ie:70-300) the longer (or more telephoto-ish) the lens .... ?! correct me if I'm wrong

Seems from ebay that a decent telephoto will set me back about $2K, so maybe that will have to wait a little while ......

Any advice on lens choice much appreciated ....

I'd guess, by looking at your site, that you are not entirely new to photography, maybe just to D-SLR's? If you get a 20D, which you will love BTW, forget the kit lens. Buy the body, get a better lens. I for one love the 17-40L F4..very nice! Don't waste money on the kit lens knowing it's not that high quality, and probably wont be used. I got it with my Rebel...stopped using it soon after. Resale on the kit...forget about it.

If you can afford L glass, I'd highly recommend it. It will out last your camera. It is also a tax write off, if you are claiming your business!

On the telephoto end the 70-200L F4 is very nice, and has resale value should you ever wish to upgrade to the 7-200L F2.8 IS.

Just my thoughts.........

claudermilk · June 12, 2006

Well, first of all lens basics. The focal length (example, 10-22, 70-200) is going to tell you how "long" or "wide" the lends is. The 10-22 is a wide angle suited for landscapes where the 70-200 is a telephoto, more suited to sports & some wildlife. I hear from many wildlife guys that the 70-200 is kind of short & if you really wnat to get into that you're looking at 300, 400, 500 lenses. Cha-ching! The apreture or F-stop tells you how wide the hole letting light in is, and counter-intuitively the smaller the number the larger the hole, so the expensive f2.8 lenses let in a lot of light (and are called "fast" since you can maintain a faster shutter speed), while the f4 lenses cannot open up as much. You wil soon see two things that drive lens prices up rapidly: very fast apertures like the f2.8, and constant aperture zooms like the Canon L lenses that maintain f2.8 throughout.

So with that, the next thing is what do you usually shoot? This has a huge efect on what you need. For example, while I like landscape, I most often shoot stage shows, so the 17-40/f4 is typically useless, while I really need to get the 70-200/f2.8IS (did I mention cha-ching!). If you're just learning, and have to get the kit lens, stick with it until you get accustomed to the camera. I've heard good things about the 17-85 IS as a kit. Whichever lens you get first, stick with the one, do some research & make sure of what you need, then get a good one. I wouldn't rush to get a whole pile of lenses until you know you need them, and then get the best ones you can. For me, I stuck with just getting a 50/1.8 and shot with that for most of a year, borrowing or renting others as needed before I moved on to the next one. At this point I have a very solid list of what I plan to get & have a very good idea of why they are on my list.

Canon 20D lens advice

Comments