Lens advice please

cyberchickgeek

cyberchickgeek

Suspended / Banned
Messages
87
Name
Emma
Edit My Images
No
Hi,I currently have a 650d with my two fave Lens the canon 10-22mm wide angle and the 50mm 1.4 which I love for portraits

I'm now after a decent focal length range lens for general outdoor /landscape photography , I was looking at a the telephoto zoom lenses but spoilt for choice! any recommendations ??


Cheers :)
 
What sort of money are you thinking os spending, and are you considering 2nd too?
 
I want a quality lens that I won't need to upgrade anytime soon so Im willing to spend up too £500-600 or save, I don't mind 2nd hand so long as top condition :)
 
IMHO you couldn't go far wrong with the 17-55 2.8 for that camera / budget
 
I would suggest the EF-S 15-85. Although the widest aperture isn't breathtaking, it is well up to producing breathtaking landscape shots and is the lens that lives on my 7D 80% of the time. It also has an excellent IS system and great build quality.
 
you have four choices,

get a mid zoom maybe the canon 15-85mm f3.5.5.6 IS, this is good as a walk around lens

A telephoto, I would go with the 70-200 f4l non is, I have this, it's a very good lens for wildlife this lens is pretty cheap for a L lens, I picked mine up from amazon.co.uk for £445.

A super zoom lens, this would be canon's 18-200 or tamaron/sigma equivilant, these are good if you don't want to miss a shot from changing lenses but they lack the image quality of "dedicated lenses" as there is much more distortion and CA from these lenses however this can be corrected in post with canons provided software.

you could of coarse go for prime lenses, these are the best as image quality goes but are much more expensive and some are out of your stated budget, if you were to choose this route I would recommend the canon 135mm f2l for the telephoto end (imo you should skip the 85mm if you choose primes) which you can pick up £859 from amazon, (you could also go for the 200mm f/2.8L II for £599 but imo the 135's quality might suit you for portraits)
 
Last edited:
I'd say try and pick up a 70-200L lens. You may be able to pick up the 2.8mki, but if not the f/4 is a great lens too.

I have the '2.8mkii IS' and its by far my favourite and most used lens.

I know a lot of people use the 70-200 for telephoto landscapes too.
 
15-85mm is a good all round lens, but perhaps it overlaps too much with the 10-22 mm.

Maybe it's time to invest in your first L lens 24 -105 f/4? :-P

Failing that could get a 17-50 Tamron 2.8 AND have enough to invest in a 85mm 1.8, both very capable. Both can be had for under 600 notes brand new.

A super zoom 18-200 mm + is always useful as a one lens solution, but the op sounds like someone who appreciate dedicated lens for dedicated purposes :-)
 
Thanks for all your help, I had my eyes on the canon 17-55 2.8 but wondered if the range was not big enough.
after doing some more youtube review watching !

I'm considering the canon 17-200 2.8 L lens! but would need to do some saving :-0
Or could still have a luxury lens and get the 17-200 4.0 for nearly half the price minus the IS though

Your right my other lenses have been specific for what I'm using them for but this lens is hard to pick, as for one theres so many ! With without IS , L lens no L lens , different Aperture. different brands make the costs differ so much !
 
cyberchickgeek said:
Thanks for all your help, I had my eyes on the canon 17-55 2.8 but wondered if the range was not big enough.
after doing some more youtube review watching !

I'm considering the canon 17-200 2.8 L lens! but would need to do some saving :-0
Or could still have a luxury lens and get the 17-200 4.0 for nearly half the price minus the IS though

Your right my other lenses have been specific for what I'm using them for but this lens is hard to pick, as for one theres so many ! With without IS , L lens no L lens , different Aperture. different brands make the costs differ so much !
Click to expand...

hmm I think you read wrong, it would be the 70-200 f4l or 2.8l, there are non-IS and IS models of both lenses if you cant quite afford the 2.8 IS then the non-IS might be better and the F4l IS is the next best and then the F4 non-IS, remember you only really need IS if your taking indoor photos or outdoor sports in low light, landscapes less so because you can use i tripod and slower shutter speed, I manage fine with the F4l non-IS even at some gigs you can get decent images e.g.


IMG_4382.jpg by ChristianJ-R, on Flickr

one of mine with the 70-200 f4l non-IS

you should maybe also consider the 24-105 f4l IS (here on amazon http://SPAM/b3jweu6) which might suit your needs better for landscape to mid zoom?
 
Last edited:
No I know I was on about other makes and focal range lengths that do IS and dont.

I'm impressed with that shot and my dad plays in a band and wants some pics so its great knowing that lens would be suitable for that too! I more than likely slightly edit my pics with software so low light can be fixed up a bit. Please could u resend utube link its not working :-/
 
ah I see, sorry :/ I've never heard of the 17-200 f2.8L

note the photo I took was shot at 1/160 ƒ/4 ISO 800 and the noise was reduced in Adobe Lightroom as well as other tweaks a ƒ/2.8 will let more light increasing your variables with iso, shutter and aperture however an IS model works a bit differently on this, it will let the same ammont of light in (depending on whether its a f4 or f2.8) but also giving the ability to shoot at slower shutter speeds and therefore lower iso's as in low light situations (but this may only help on static subjects and wont work as well on moving subjects, there are two modes on the IS i believe for when your tracking a moving subject but im not sure this will help that much with shutter speeds slower that 1/100 and moving objects)

here is the youtube link again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtODT5jJMHo

the video gives you an impression of the size of the lenses (you should also consider this) and weight as well as a comparison of them all (the 70-200 L lenses)
 
Last edited:
I used to love my 17-40 L as a walkabout lens..well within your budget
 
Thinking ahead, I'd say the 17-55mm f2.8 and 70-200mm (probably f4 IS) would be my next two lenses if I were you. My lens line up on my 50D and 7D was virtually the same as yours (plus those two) and it worked well.

The 17-55mm is great for landscapes and general purpose lens, it's fast, sharp and versatile and in your budget.
 
Lol thats prob *** there isn't one,maybe I didnt word it well , I just meant in general theres different factors which highlight each lens the 2.8 feature I was talking about the 17-55mm but then thats not got a big focal length on that so lacks there.

Thanks for the vid will check it out :)

and thanks will research that lens too
 
justinminns said:
Thinking ahead, I'd say the 17-55mm f2.8 and 70-200mm (probably f4 IS) would be my next two lenses if I were you. My lens line up on my 50D and 7D was virtually the same as yours (plus those two) and it worked well.

The 17-55mm is great for landscapes and general purpose lens, it's fast, sharp and versatile and in your budget.
Click to expand...

So you mainly used the 17-55 for landscape , have u got any shots u would share ? :)
 
QUOTE="N01Chris"]ah I see, sorry :/ I've never heard of the 17-200 f2.8 )[/QUOTE]

I read back Lol I meant 70-200 but don't know where u got 2.8 I was on about another lens then
My head hurts :-/ lol
 
Last edited:
wow lovely shots! thanks for those, yeah I use my 10-22mm a lot but like you said sometimes u just dont want the wide angle, thanks for all your help will study all the lens people have mentioned on youtube aswell and will hopefully make my mind up soon :-)
 
Thanks for all your advice Ive decided with the canon 70-200mm F4 L non IS , it will be my first L lens too and I can't wait to get it! I would still like to save up for the 2.8 version one day though

got a bargain on eBay £474.99 plus £40 canon cash back deal :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top