New lens for 7d

Robclarke

Robclarke

Suspended / Banned
Messages
641
Edit My Images
Yes
I have got a Canon 7D with a kit 18-135 lens having upgraded from a bridge camera. I am very pleased with it so far but am looking to invest in some better glass at some stage. I am considering the 50mm 1.4 prime to use alongside the kit lens. Is this a good choice?

I shoot a wide variety of subjects such as portraits, non-posed pictures at indoor parties and architecture.

I sometimes find that I need to bump up the ISO more than I would like for indoor shots with the kit lens.
 
Put your 18-135 on 50mm and leave it there. Try taking photos for a day or so at that focal length only and see how you feel. Don't worry about the ISO settings for the moment, it's more to see how you'd feel about a 50mm lens. There's also the nifty fifty (50mm 1.8) which is a lot cheaper and can be had for £80 new from kerso on here.

The logical choice for better, faster glass would be a 17-55 F2.8. The real problem is once you start using better glass, you start to see why the better glass is more expensive - and that can be costly ;)
 
Last edited:
arad85 said:
Put your 18-135 on 50mm and leave it there. Try taking photos for a day or so at that focal length only and see how you feel. Don't worry about the ISO settings for the moment, it's more to see how you'd feel about a 50mm lens. There's also the nifty fifty (50mm 1.8) which is a lot cheaper and can be had for £80 new from kerso on here.

The logical choice for better, faster glass would be a 17-55 F2.8. The real problem is once you start using better glass, you start to see why the better glass is more expensive - and that can be costly ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the response.

The focal length of the 17-55 would overlap with that of my 18-135 so I would probably look to swap that for something else in the long term if I did go down that route. If so what would you suggest instead of the 18-135?
 
17-55 2.8 and 70-200 F4L

You don't miss the 15mm in between (had 18-55 and 70-200 for about a year)...
 
Thanks for the advice. I will investigate this course of action.
 
Tysonator said:
I agree with L55GDS on the combo.
So sell the 18-135 as I suspect this is one of canons cheaper consumer lens.
Click to expand...

The 18-135 is actually a very good lens!! I'd keep hold of it, its the best walkabout / travel lens I've ever used!
 
arad85 said:
Seems to be thoroughly beaten in resolution tests by the (more expensive) 15-85. See: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0
Click to expand...

And???

Its a travel lens, the IQ isnt going to compete with the massively more expensive 15-85 so I'm not sure what your point is? The last thing on my mind when I'm trudging across north Africa is resolution tests, more getting the shot.

Its still a cracking lens and at 35mm its as sharp as my prime and actually delivers better colour rendering.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
And???

Its a travel lens, the IQ isnt going to compete with the massively more expensive 15-85 so I'm not sure what your point is? The last thing on my mind when I'm trudging across north Africa is resolution tests, more getting the shot.
Click to expand...
I'd say the 15-85 was a travel lens too. And when compared to the cost of a 7D, the 15-85 cost isn't outrageous.

odd jim said:
The last thing on my mind when I'm trudging across north Africa is resolution tests, more getting the shot.
Click to expand...
The last thing I want to be worried about when trudging around Western USA is that if only I'd spent a bit more, the perfectly framed picture I've just captured would have been sharper with another, just as versatile, lens.

Different people have different priorities. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
arad85 said:
I'd say the 15-85 was a travel lens too. And when compared to the cost of a 7D, the 15-85 cost isn't outrageous.

The last thing I want to be worried about when trudging around Western USA is that if only I'd spent a bit more, the perfectly framed picture I've just captured would have been sharper with another, just as versatile, lens.

Different people have different priorities. Nothing more, nothing less.
Click to expand...

The iq differences are completely negligible on a normal sized print or unless you pixel peep, so the extra range, after testing, swayed me to the longer lens. I used an old 17-85 before and found the range utterly limiting for a travel lens. I get far better shots with the 18-135 as it's simply far more useable.

The iq of the 18-135 is very good as well, in testing it performed far better than the examples on dp review.

Horses for courses but the advantage of the better range of the 135 lens outweighed the slightly better iq of the more expensive, more limited lens, as good as it is.

But, going back to the op, I think the 17-55 IS and a 70-200 is the way to go. I mentioned keeping the 18-135 as those two would be too heavy to take on holiday so the op might want a lighter compromise!
 
Last edited:
It is interesting to have a different opinion. I guess the advantages that the 17-55 are mainly the wide aperture and it's use in low light photography and a slight image quality advantage. The disadvantage is the focal length range compared to the 18-135.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top