Lenses for 7d

J

jimigraham

Suspended / Banned
Messages
19
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

Having found my Canon IXUS too limiting I'm moving to DSLR so a lot of this world is new to me.

I'll be shooting travel so mainly landscapes plus the odd airshow and portrait.
I've basically made my mind up on the 7d. The 5dMkII did come into consideration (and price isn't an issue) but as I've read the AF is showing its age and I like the idea of video on the 7d should the need arise...

For my needs would anyone advise on which lens(es) I should be considering?

I need something wide for landscapes (obviously the 1.6x crop will limit me) but also a walkabout for my travels. Later in the year I'll get a 70-200L IS so ignore that range for now.

Is there a single lens that will cater for my needs?
I'm looking at 15-85 and also 17-55 but neither feel perfect. There seem to be no L lenses that fit the bill either.

Thanks
 
Hi and welcome to the madhouse that is TP!

The canon 10-22mm is considered the best wide angle lens for crop Canon cameras. A close 2nd is the Sigma version but there is also a Tokina 11-16 that is very good.

One lens i loved (and stupidly sold!) was the 24-105 f/4 L for a general walk about lens. It has IS which helps when light is getting low and for bright days it's my fave zoom. I found that i could get reasonably wide landscape at 24mm. It's the image quality that i love with this lens.
 
I Got excited when I saw the thread title. Being an oldie I thought it meant lenses were being sold for seven pence.:'(
 
I'd have the say the 17-40L might be a good choice for you - it's almost an ideal walkabout lens equating to about 27 -64mm on your 7D.
 
I am surprised that you don't feel that the 17-55/2.8 IS is right - What is it that you don't like about the lens? I ask as that would have been my recommendation for a walkabout lens. It is really sharp, great low light at a constant aperture, for a crop sensor, it doesn't get much better in my opinion. It doesn't have the red ring, but that doesn't make it a slouch.
 
Hi Andy,

Thanks for your reply.
I've seen the 10-22 but not sure it will be long enough for other needs.
The 24-105 was considered as well but it probably deserves a 5dMkII body. Also I'm not sure 24 is wide enough.

I suppose what I'm realising is that I need 2 lenses? Problem is I can't justify that expense right now (being amateur and all).
 
swag72 said:
I am surprised that you don't feel that the 17-55/2.8 IS is right - What is it that you don't like about the lens? I ask as that would have been my recommendation for a walkabout lens. It is really sharp, great low light at a constant aperture, for a crop sensor, it doesn't get much better in my opinion. It doesn't have the red ring, but that doesn't make it a slouch.
Click to expand...

The negatives are weather/dust sealing and 17mm is possibly cutting it for good landscapes. This lens is probably my first choice though, I hear the IQ is great.
 
The 15-85 or the 17-55 are your choices.

Forget the 24-105 cos as great a lens as it is it is waay too wide on a croppy.
 
jimigraham said:
Hi Andy,

Thanks for your reply.
I've seen the 10-22 but not sure it will be long enough for other needs.
The 24-105 was considered as well but it probably deserves a 5dMkII body. Also I'm not sure 24 is wide enough.

I suppose what I'm realising is that I need 2 lenses? Problem is I can't justify that expense right now (being amateur and all).
Click to expand...

I had mine on a 40D and it was superb. It's the image quality that i loved. The focal length was fine for me also.
 
I have a 17-55/f2.8 on my 40D and I have to say I really regret buying it. One problem is I find it too short, which I fully accept is my fault for not considering the type of photos I take sufficiently enough before buying it (swayed by the great reviews), but not withstanding that I am not overly impressed with the results and to be honest the results from my old 17-85 where almost as good. I also don't find that I haven't gained much from the f2.8, unlike I do with my macro lens.

Having said that maybe I just have a bad copy, as everyone else seems to rave about it and I am sure most others would recommend this as being their first choice, but for me I wish I had gone for the 24-105/f4.

I believe the new(Ish) 15-85 gets some good reviews so that might be a good option.

Given the photos you plan to take wouldn't the 5D Mark II make a better choice and this would also have video. There was a thread on here recently about its AF and the general opinion seemed to be it wasn't as bad as people make out and someone mentioned using it for planes in flight. I would look for the thread but I'm using my phone so typing this was hard work.

I only say this about the cameras as I had planned to upgrade to a 7D, but the more a I read the more I feel the 5D is better due to imagine quality. Plus I can get rid of that 17-55 lens!
 
I run a 17-55 f2.8 on my 7D and it's a great combination. The 17-55 is "almost" L glass quality and provides a great focal length range for most stuff.

I also have the 70-200 f2.8, a 50mm 1.8 and 10-20mm, other than something up in the 400mm range for birds & wildlife, I feel I have most bases covered. If you are going to be doing portraits, then the 85mm f1.8 would be handy.

Hope that helps.

Steve
 
Jelster said:
The 17-55 is "almost" L glass quality
Steve
Click to expand...

The 17-55 is supposed to be L quality glass but it has not got the weather proofing which is why it's not go the red ring. Stunning lens!
 
i Had a 7D before moving to Nikon and had a Canon 15-85 IS lens which i was amazed how sharp it was and with the IS makes for an excellent walk about lens.

Obviously you will also need a lens with some reach for Airshows and anything telephoto, a good place to start would be Canon 70-200 F4 or if you can afford the extra f2.8 non IS.
The Sigma 70-200 f2.8 non OS and the Sigma 100-300 f4 would also be a obvious choice if you do decide against the Canon.
 
I'm also new to DSLRs and have just purchased a Canon 7D. I thought long and hard about which lens(es) to go for and ended up buying 3 of them:

- EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5
- EF 50mm f/1.4
- EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro

I had previously tried an 18-55mm kit lens on a borrowed 450D (also a crop sensor), and
it really wasn't wide enough for good wide angled shots.

The EF-S 10-22mm is fantastic on the 7D and I'd definitely recommend buying this for your landscapes, then figuring out what else you'd like to photograph and save for a lens which is suited to that.
 
Thanks everyone for these suggestions. This forum is amazing!

If I went for the 17-55 that would actually be 27.2 at the short end right?
This makes me wonder if I should just get the 5D and 24-105. It would cost me £350 more (ish) but I'd have alot more flexibility. But.. is this camera a bit overkill for somebody whose never owned (though used a 40D) before...
 
For landscapes & portrait work the 5D2 will be perfect, but remember you will only be able to use EF lenses. In fact, with the huge amount of pixels you have you'll only be able use decent glass, anything less will be obvious by the IQ.

A 24-70, and a 100-400 for the airshows would be a great combination...

Steve
 
I was actually thinking that the 5D2 would be the better choice as well, coupled with a 24-105 (or 24-70) and 100-400. The AF of the 5D2 may not be state of art but IMHO it is plenty good enough for the subject matter listed. I've owned both cameras for over a year. Certainly the 5D2 can AF on BIF and aircraft - been there, done that. Portraits and landscapes are hardly a stretch. Both cameras offer video.

There's nothing wrong with the 7D either, and it has a feature list as long as your arm. I just think the 5D2 is the better match for the subject matter mentioned in the original post. The lens options may be a better fit/compromise too.
 
Last edited:
With a crop sensor like the 7D I would have thought the perfect line up for general use would be:

10-22 (My favorite lens, amazing!)
17-55 (Constant f/2.8 and L quality)
70-200 (You have already stated you are getting one and awesome lens)

and a couple of primes depending on what you want to shoot. I have the 10-22, 17-70 Sig and 70-300 and they cover 90% of my needs very well.
 
Last edited:
For a 7D I agree, and I have used exactly that lens line-up for my crop body cameras, but nowadays I tend to reserve my 7D for long shots and action shooting (with my 85/1.8, 70-200/2.8 IS and 100-400) and I usually choose the 5D2 for portraits, landscapes and general photography.
 
Last edited:
Fitzy said:
I have a 17-55/f2.8 on my 40D and I have to say I really regret buying it. One problem is I find it too short, which I fully accept is my fault for not considering the type of photos I take sufficiently enough before buying it (swayed by the great reviews), but not withstanding that I am not overly impressed with the results and to be honest the results from my old 17-85 where almost as good. I also don't find that I haven't gained much from the f2.8, unlike I do with my macro lens.
Click to expand...

You're honestly the first person I've ever seen who's said this. I'd seriously consider getting it checked to see if there's something wrong with it.

topcatproduction said:
With a crop sensor like the 7D I would have thought the perfect line up for general use would be:

10-22 (My favorite lens, amazing!)
17-55 (Constant f/2.8 and L quality)
70-200 (You have already stated you are getting one and awesome lens)
Click to expand...

It is! ;)

(I'm just missing the 7D :( )
 
Last edited:
Jackwow said:
Yes. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Can you explain to an amateur what this means?
As it's crop that would be 24 x 1.6 so doesn't seem wide at all.
Or do you mean it would suffer more distortion? Regardless it seems a waste of glass because only the center is used.

So, with this said, I'll be pulling the trigger on a 5dMkII kit :thumbs:

I'll be trekking Patagonia and visiting Rio in April so you can imagine the sort of landscapes I'll be getting. I think I might need a shorter lens because 24mm will be heavily distorted.


Thanks all, now I must learn how to use the beast to its potential :help:
 
Jackwow said:
The 15-85 or the 17-55 are your choices.

Forget the 24-105 cos as great a lens as it is it is waay too wide on a croppy.
Click to expand...

I think he means the revers, it won't be wide enough on a crop sensor body.

Steve
 
jimigraham said:
Can you explain to an amateur what this means?
As it's crop that would be 24 x 1.6 so doesn't seem wide at all.
Or do you mean it would suffer more distortion? Regardless it seems a waste of glass because only the center is used.

So, with this said, I'll be pulling the trigger on a 5dMkII kit :thumbs:

I'll be trekking Patagonia and visiting Rio in April so you can imagine the sort of landscapes I'll be getting. I think I might need a shorter lens because 24mm will be heavily distorted.


Thanks all, now I must learn how to use the beast to its potential :help:
Click to expand...
You're correct about the crop factor and you're also correct that 24mm on a crop body is not very wide at all. In terms of angle of view it's equivalent to a 38.4mm lens on a full frame body.

I don't understand the remark about distortion. 24mm is 24mm is 24mm. So long as the lens is of decent quality there should be no cause to fear "distortion". 24mm in the middle of the range of a 16-35 lens, or a 24mm prime, or a 24-70 or a 24-105 will all be 24mm and should all create images of similar shape. If you were to stick those lenses on a crop body at 24mm then the results would be much the same as using a 17-55, 15-85, 17-85, 18-55 or anything else set to 24mm.

Here's 24mm from a 24-70 on a 5D2....

20100110_115249_1247_LR.jpg


You can achieve some creative effects through perspective distortion with a wide angle lens, but getting a shorter (wider) lens will not reduce that sort of distortion. Perspective distortion is caused by moving in close to your subject, which a wide lens may encourage, and thus altering relative distances between very close and somewhat close parts of the scene from the camera's point of view.

20100327_141858_2592_LR.jpg


The distortion reduces if you move further back.

Regarding only using the centre of the lens if using an EF lens on a crop body, while that is true it also makes use of the best part of the lens - the sharpest part, the part with least distortion (slight as it may be) and the part with least corner falloff. I would worry less about that aspect of things than having the correct focal length range, the aperture range you need and adequate build and weatherproofing to survive the conditions you will encounter.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top