which lens to get next for my next trip???

wheresdavid

i have an xti, 50mm 1.8, just got a 24-105L ($959 B&H) :wink and I am looking to get one more lens to take on my next trip. I am planning to go to the North shore of Minesota and also out to southern Utah to take some landscape photos. then I am off to South East Asia (i Think). When traveling i like to take people photos. my budget is around $600 but could be stretchd a bit for the perfect lens. I am thinking of something around 10-20 for landscape (or is the 24 end of the L series lens good enough) or maybe the 70-200 4L for people shots. Worried a bit about low light and handholding but i think IS is too much for me and maybe to heavy as well. I have room in my lowepro pack for the 70-200. or do i go with a prime like the 135mm f/2 L becuase with the 24-105 i may miss a lot of people shots because even if i can had hold in low for stationary objects, people are "moving targets".

any thoughts :scratch ?
Thanks

ziggy53

wheresdavid wrote:

i have an xti, 50mm 1.8, just got a 24-105L ($959 B&H) and I am looking to get one more lens to take on my next trip. I am planning to go to the North shore of Minesota and also out to southern Utah to take some landscape photos. then I am off to South East Asia (i Think). When traveling i like to take people photos. my budget is around $600 but could be stretchd a bit for the perfect lens. I am thinking of something around 10-20 for landscape (or is the 24 end of the L series lens good enough) or maybe the 70-200 4L for people shots. Worried a bit about low light and handholding but i think IS is too much for me and maybe to heavy as well. I have room in my lowepro pack for the 70-200. or do i go with a prime like the 135mm f/2 L becuase with the 24-105 i may miss a lot of people shots because even if i can had hold in low for stationary objects, people are "moving targets".

any thoughts ?
Thanks

You are thinking correctly about your choices, and an argument could be made for any of them.

Since you have the EF 24-105mm, I suggest that the EF-S 10-20mm (or similar Ultra-Wide from another manufacturer) would be "my" next choice for intimate people photography, especially indoors in cramped quarters, and for vista landscapes. (The 17mm-20mm range is a pretty important one for me on a crop 1.6x camera.)

Then get the EF 135mm and a 1.4x telextender, and you have a fairly compact kit, versatile enough for most anything except small wildlife.

claudermilk

I would lean towards the UWAs since Utah is in your plans. The top two choices are the Canon 10-22 or Tokina 12-24. These are the subject of constant debates & are both excellent lenses. The Canon will be just about or just above your budget, the Tokina is $150-200 less expensive (not "cheaper" though ).

The main differences are: 2mm range difference, the Canon is variable aperture f3.5-f4.5 while the Tokina is constant f4, the Canon body reminds me of the kit lenses while the Tokina reminds me of L lenses. Decide what's most important to you. Image quality of the two is about equal with minor differences in the UWA distortion, color, CA, etc.

For the longer end, IIRC the 70-200/4 is just in your budget, none of the other 70-200's are even close. All variations are stellar lenses (I've now used a 70-200/4, many 70-200/2.8IS, and own a 70-200/2.8). The 135/2 is also a fantastic lens, but is pricey ($1k range IIRC). I would go for one of these last.

mikan

I too would suggest the wide angle. On our most recent trip to Italy, we mainly used our 10-22mm and 24-105mm. The 70-200mm barely saw the light of day. I'm so glad we had the 10-22mm -- there were multiple times that the 24-105 just wasn't wide enough. However, we don't focus our photography much on people shots.

Strav

prob. one of the few that was disappointed with my 10-22, and I sold it recently. Too much edge distortion for my liking unless you were at 20mm or greater, and at that focal length I'd rather have a prime. The fact that it is only d-slr compatible is another knock against it in the event you ever wanted to say shoot something like film.

wheresdavid

follow up question to your post
i am continuing on my "around the world once in a liftime" tip next week and i am starting to panic a bit. i like to travel really light and i am thinking that my backpack is way to heavy so i was going to leave my laptop, tripod (i know) and my 80-200L 2.8 at home. this would cut about 13.4 pounds out of my pack. now i am thinking i don't have enough reach, as was thinking about maybe getting a canon 70-200 4 non L or a canon 200mm L 2.8. i like to take people photos as well as wildlife , market scenes ....

what do you think about my two choices? or should i just go with what i have - 24-105l is, 50mm 1.8, sigma 10-20???

any advice?

cheers,

Dave

quote=ziggy53]You are thinking correctly about your choices, and an argument could be made for any of them.

Since you have the EF 24-105mm, I suggest that the EF-S 10-20mm (or similar Ultra-Wide from another manufacturer) would be "my" next choice for intimate people photography, especially indoors in cramped quarters, and for vista landscapes. (The 17mm-20mm range is a pretty important one for me on a crop 1.6x camera.)

Then get the EF 135mm and a 1.4x telextender, and you have a fairly compact kit, versatile enough for most anything except small wildlife.[/quote]

saurora

I have the Canon 10-20 and love it. It is a joy to carry it's so light and although not L quality, the photos are very sharp. Great for shooting people up close in congested, high traffic areas, I'm taking mine to the fair tonight. Of course you do need to keep people away from the edige of the frame for distortion! The way you travel and because you mostly shoot people and want them tack sharp, I would prioritize my decision with weight and then light grabbing ability. I like Ziggy's suggestion of the 135 prime with an extender. Even if you have to hold off and wait to purchase the extender, the 135 is so darn sharp you can crop pretty heavily for getting closeups from a distant shot. I've never heard anything but high praise for this lens if you can afford it. Just my 2 cents! (You have great face shots, but they would be amazing with the 135!)

z_28

70-200/4L may be a perfect choice.
Lightweight, great optical performance, good price.
For sure you will need something much longer than 105mm.

sirsloop

I've shot a few events with my ef10-22... but I prefer the 35/2 for portraits (on a 1.6x body). I know there's a Bigma for sale on the forums right now for like $675... . Wanna talk about your one lens wonder, granted you will be real limited as far as big aperture goes. The 24-70L and the 50-500 would be a neat 2 lens combo for travel if you dont mind the weight of the bigma. I'm personally taking my 10-22, 35/2 and 70-200/2.8L with my on my honeymoon...

jonnypb

i would go for the canon 10-22 or sigma 10-20 for your xti. both are great lenses and if money is an issue the sigma performs perfectly well. the optics are great on both. the 24-105 is too wide on a crop body for landscapes, city pics etc

another lens to put on the shopping list is the canon 70-300is - a fantastic lens and image quality is as good as some of the L lenses

sirsloop

jonnypb wrote:

another lens to put on the shopping list is the canon 70-300is - a fantastic lens and image quality is as good as some of the L lenses

Lol... IDK if this is appropriate or not but i'm selling my 70-300IS. Its no reserve w/ bids (so its sold)...ends tomorrow morning. Its definitly a great little travel lens! Super compact, light, and sharp! I'd get an UWA before a lens like this... but figured id point this out!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=280135679362&ssPageName=STRK:MESE:IT&ih=018

Awais Yaqub

South east Asia ! i don't know about what lens etc but you are going to see lots of narrow streets full of chracters so wide lens may help there.
Yesterday i read most people lose their cams because they dont hang them on neck so be careful there.
Waiting for photos

redryder

Another vote for the Canon EF-S 10-22. I have that lens and also the 24-105. For a while my walk around pack consisted of 30D, 10-22,24-105,70-200 f2.8IS, 50mm 1.4 & 85mm 1.8. Yea, I know It's alot to carry around all the time. But, what I realized was the lenses I reached for most of the time were the 24-105 then the 10-22. So now I travel light, 30D 10-22 & 24-105. I love that combo.
Happy travels and I look forward to seeing your photos.

wheresdavid

thanks for the help - i have made a decision
Sorry I think my post was a little miss leading since I did it it two parts about 3 months apart. afterm y first post I purchased a sigma 10-20 and the 24-105, i still have my 50mm 1.8. I felt that the 24-105 wasn't going to perform for me in low light situations for portraits (though I will probably use this lens most of the time) I went for broke and bought the 135L! i should get it the day before I leave .

i ended up selling my 80-200l because of the weight issue, i am sure in hind side I will wish that i had the reach.

thanks again for all the input!

cheers,

Dave

saurora wrote:

I have the Canon 10-20 and love it. It is a joy to carry it's so light and although not L quality, the photos are very sharp. Great for shooting people up close in congested, high traffic areas, I'm taking mine to the fair tonight. Of course you do need to keep people away from the edige of the frame for distortion! The way you travel and because you mostly shoot people and want them tack sharp, I would prioritize my decision with weight and then light grabbing ability. I like Ziggy's suggestion of the 135 prime with an extender. Even if you have to hold off and wait to purchase the extender, the 135 is so darn sharp you can crop pretty heavily for getting closeups from a distant shot. I've never heard anything but high praise for this lens if you can afford it. Just my 2 cents! (You have great face shots, but they would be amazing with the 135!)