lens suggestions for glacier shootout

Bendr

Hi folks!

In preparation for the glacier shootout, I'm working on upgrading my lenses so that I have a good varied range with quality lenses...

Right now I shoot with a Rebel XT and the lenses I own are...

Canon 50mm f/1.8
Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro USM
Canon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG

In general, I've not been that happy with the image quality of the last two, so, I'm considering selling those two and and buying the following...

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Canon 24-105 f/4L IS USM
Canon 70-200 f/4L USM

My two main concerns with this set-up, are that it doesn't leave me with much in the way of wide aperature, and that it only takes me out to 200mm. Are these reasonable concerns?

For the long zoom I was thinking of dropping the 70-200 f/4 and getting the Canon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 IS my theory is that it gives me a little more reach and IS.

Or would I be better off, if I can save up enough to get either a 70-200 f/2.8L or 70-200 f/4L IS and perhaps add a 1.4x teleconverter

With the mid-range zoom, I've considered getting the EF-S 18-55 2.8 IS instead, I figure that gives me more light but I don't like that I lose the extra range, and the L Build quality...

Any thoughts???

Thanks,
Ben

davev

Bendr wrote:

Hi folks!

In preparation for the glacier shootout, I'm working on upgrading my lenses so that I have a good varied range with quality lenses...

Right now I shoot with a Rebel XT and the lenses I own are...

Canon 50mm f/1.8
Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro USM
Canon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG

In general, I've not been that happy with the image quality of the last two, so, I'm considering selling those two and and buying the following...

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Canon 24-105 f/4L IS USM
Canon 70-200 f/4L USM

My two main concerns with this set-up, are that it doesn't leave me with much in the way of wide aperature, and that it only takes me out to 200mm. Are these reasonable concerns?

For the long zoom I was thinking of dropping the 70-200 f/4 and getting the Canon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 IS my theory is that it gives me a little more reach and IS.

Or would I be better off, if I can save up enough to get either a 70-200 f/2.8L or 70-200 f/4L IS and perhaps add a 1.4x teleconverter

With the mid-range zoom, I've considered getting the EF-S 18-55 2.8 IS instead, I figure that gives me more light but I don't like that I lose the extra range, and the L Build quality...

Any thoughts???

Thanks,
Ben

It's tough for me to what you should buy for the shootout, but I can tell you what I'm bring with me.
Cameras: Canon 30D (for me) and a Canon XT (for the wife)
Lenses: Tamron 18-50 F2.8, Canon 28-300is, Canon 400L F5.6, Kenko 1.5 TC.
For the wife: Tamron 18-200 DI, Canon 70-300is.

For the shootout last year, I'll bet I had the Tamron 18-200 on my camera at least 80% of the time.
I should add that at that time I didn't have the 28-300is, or the 18-50 F2.8.

I can handle the weight of the bigger lenses, both carrying and shooting.
My wife will like the lighter lenses and the fact that if she wants, she can just stick with the Tamron.

I do think that the 10-22, 24-105, 70-300is combo would serve you well for this trip. After the trip is over, well, that would be for you to say.

Ann McRae

My lens collection is:

17 - 85mm IS - a lovely lens for a walk around, all purpose lens. I use it lots for outdoor, good light photos. I used it almost exclusively in Bryce and Zion.

70 - 200 mm f2.8 IS - my soccer lens. I used it a bit in Bryce, for 'detail' shots.

I also own the 85mmf1.8 and the 135mmf2.0, which are great indoor sports and portrait lenses but not too useful for landscapes (although I did shoot with the 135 in Zion and got some interesting shots as a result.

What I expect to be most useful in Glacier is the 17 - 85mm for landscapes. My wishlist would have another wide on it, say 10 - 22mm.

There will be wildlife to shoot - I hope that the 70 - 200mmm will work or that skippy chooses to bring her 400mm and leave her 70 - 200 home!!

So, bottom line - something wide, something middle and something ith a bit of reach. And the fewer lens changes the better - remember you have to carry what you bring, and I guarentee we will be walking at altitude.......

ann

20DNoob

If I were in your place I'd go with the 10-22 and the 28-300.

You would save $100(or more depending where you shop), no overlap, and getting the extra 100mm on the long end.

Then again I don't like having to change lenses so I may be biased.

Bendr

thanks for the advice...

So many choices! Such a tough decision!
At least I still have some time to decide, and if I decide I don't like a setup, I can always sell a lens and recover most of the money

Ann McRae wrote:

And the fewer lens changes the better - remember you have to carry what you bring, and I guarentee we will be walking at altitude.......

This is something I really need to remember, and pay attention to...

Terrence

Specifically for the Glacier trip, I picked up a Tokina 12-24 for the
landscapes. I expect to have this mounted most of the time. The Canon 10-22 or similar wide angle would serve you well.

I had a Sigma 17-70, recently sold, that I planned to take. The advice I got here was that that range would be OK, but I might be kicking myself for something wider once I got there. I was able to swing it, so I went wider.

Here's what else I am bringing
- Canon 30D
- Canon XT for a backup
- Canon 24-105 - don't expect to use this too much
- Canon 100-400 - here moosey, moosey
- Canon 1.4x TC

All that will go in my ThinkTank SpeedFreak and I'm ready to rock.

Scott_Quier

Can't really tell you what to bring. What I'm bringing:

20D
30D
EF-S 10-22
EF-S 17-55
EF 85 f1.8 (or both if I have room)
EF 100-400L (yet to buy)
1.4 TC (yet to buy)

And all my memory cards!

And, I want to bring my 70-200 so bad it hurts, but I'm afraid it will really hurt to lug all that around!

mmmatt

Bendr wrote:

Hi folks!

snip...

For the long zoom I was thinking of dropping the 70-200 f/4 and getting the Canon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 IS my theory is that it gives me a little more reach and IS.

...snip...

Any thoughts???

Thanks,
Ben

I used the 70-300 IS for a day and I thought it was REALLY soft. Not the DO mind you... I have no experience with that one, but the $550 version is not much of a lens IMO. Certainly no comparison to the 70-200 f4L in sharpness and color to my eye anyway. If you think about it, IS is about a $300+ add on for most long zoom lenses so you are buying $250 glass + IS. If you need the IS that is one thing, but if you don't I vote for the f4L. I'm not sure of the general concensus of that lens around here, but I love mine, and it is surprisingly light.

Matt

Bendr

Thanks again for all of the advice!

I hadn't really looked at it before, but after looking at it, now i'm considering the 100-400L IS I figure at this point, I'll save and see what I can afford...