What lens next?

JakeT1992

JakeT1992

Suspended / Banned
Messages
7,286
Name
Jake
Edit My Images
No
Now I've finally bought a new car I'm now after new camera equipment :clap:

I currently have a canon 40d, kit 18-55 lens, and a 50mm f1.8.
I tend to do landscapes more than anything, and I'm after some relatively high quality glass.
What would you recommend buying next?
I've looked at a 70-200 f4 L and a sigma 10-22
 
The 70-200mm is a very good lens but I must confess mine is little used as I mainly do landscape.
The 24-105 might work well with that wide Sigma, depends if you feel the kit lens is going to be redundant.
With your sensor being cropped 105mm will give you reasonable zoom.
 
I will probably stop using the kit lens as much. I really would like some L series lenses. I struggle with colour fringing on my kit lens at times.
I wish it wasn't all so expensive! Haha.
Thanks for your advise :)
 
Tokina 12-24mm is an excellent lens...
 
Canon 17-40 mm F4L is a lovely lens to use,nice build quality
 
I don't see the point of the 17-40mm f4 on APS-C. It was designed as a full frame wide angle lens and on APS-C IMVHO it becomes a ho-hum lens of pedestrian spec. Instead, on APS-C, I'd much rather have a quality 18/18-50mm f2.8.

Anyway, back to the question. I'd go for a 17-50mm f2.8, a wide angle or a macro.
 
If you like landscapes have you had a look at the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5? It's far too wide to be a replacement for your kit lens but it is a cracking lens.
 
Thanks guys! I'm currently waiting to see what my christmas bonus is, and what santa brings me, then I'll hopefully make the purchase between christmas and new year, ready for a long weekend in Venice in january!
 
pipmurphy said:
Canon 17-40 mm F4L is a lovely lens to use,nice build quality
Click to expand...

JakeT1992 said:
Thanks for your inputs guys, I have looked at the 17-40mm also Pip :)
Click to expand...

woof woof said:
I don't see the point of the 17-40mm f4 on APS-C. It was designed as a full frame wide angle lens and on APS-C IMVHO it becomes a ho-hum lens of pedestrian spec. Instead, on APS-C, I'd much rather have a quality 18/18-50mm f2.8.

Anyway, back to the question. I'd go for a 17-50mm f2.8, a wide angle or a macro.
Click to expand...

I strongly recommend NOT going for the 17-40L on a crop body.

I've used it on crop and FF bodies in the past and whilst it impresses on FF I too found it pedestrian on a crop. The 16-35, however works nicely as a slightly restricted walkabout on a crop and a great WA for FF.

You can take great landscapes with telephoto lenses and the 70-200 f/4L is a corker of lens, especially for this purpose where speed and IS are less relevant. I'd use it on a tripod and get hold of a tripod mount to better balance the set-up.

For wide angle on a crop I'd investigate the Canon 10-22 (which gets great reports, but I have not used it personally) and the Sigma 12-24 (which I have used) - my copy of the 12-24 was great even on FF so would be super on a crop.

HTH

Phil
 
philthejuggler said:
I strongly recommend NOT going for the 17-40L on a crop body.

I've used it on crop and FF bodies in the past and whilst it impresses on FF I too found it pedestrian on a crop. The 16-35, however works nicely as a slightly restricted walkabout on a crop and a great WA for FF.

You can take great landscapes with telephoto lenses and the 70-200 f/4L is a corker of lens, especially for this purpose where speed and IS are less relevant. I'd use it on a tripod and get hold of a tripod mount to better balance the set-up.

For wide angle on a crop I'd investigate the Canon 10-22 (which gets great reports, but I have not used it personally) and the Sigma 12-24 (which I have used) - my copy of the 12-24 was great even on FF so would be super on a crop.

HTH

Phil
Click to expand...

Hi Phil,

Thanks for you're detailed response.
The 12-24 is very tempting, and quite reasonably priced!
The 70-200 is something I have always wanted, not only for landscapes, but for wildlife.
I need to invest in a new tripod also, my red snapper is a load of rubbish.
 
JakeT1992 said:
Hi Phil,

Thanks for you're detailed response.
The 12-24 is very tempting, and quite reasonably priced!
The 70-200 is something I have always wanted, not only for landscapes, but for wildlife.
I need to invest in a new tripod also, my red snapper is a load of rubbish.
Click to expand...


Delighted to help! The good thing about the two lenses you mention is that they'll both work great on full frame if you upgrade in the future. 12mm is a seriously extreme angle of view on FF!

Phil
 
philthejuggler said:
Delighted to help! The good thing about the two lenses you mention is that they'll both work great on full frame if you upgrade in the future. 12mm is a seriously extreme angle of view on FF!

Phil
Click to expand...

I'm hoping to get a 5DII so lenses that will work well on that too are ideal!
Thanks for your help Phil
 
I have a Sigma 12-24mm. On APS-C I thought it was much better than the Canon EF-S 10-22mm I previosly owned and on FF it's quite special :D
 
Personally, I would chop the kit lens in and replace with a 17-40mmL. I know what the guys mean on a crop body, but I liked it with a 40d when I had one (just saying). If you get an L zoom it will ruin what you think of the kit lens IMO.
 
Last edited:
how about:
Sigma 12-24mm - great lens, works great as WA on crop and Ultra ultra WA on FF.
24-105 f4L - great walk about lens on FF, okay semi-tele on crop.

that would allow a much easier and smoother transfer to the 5D2 you've been eyeing.

I had a sigma 12-24mm, unfortunately it was on Nikon crop, had to painfully sell it to fund a 17-40mm. similar field of view, but wish I can play with that kind of ultra wideness on FF.


do try to get rid of the kit lens, it's really quite bad when you have tried other lenses.
 
woof woof said:
I have a Sigma 12-24mm. On APS-C I thought it was much better than the Canon EF-S 10-22mm I previosly owned and on FF it's quite special :D
Click to expand...

The price and the fact its a nice wide angle for my landscapes are definitely making this seem appealing.

corny said:
Personally, I would chop the kit lens in and replace with a 17-40mmL. I know what the guys mean on a crop body, but I liked it with a 40d when I had one (just saying). If you get an L zoom it will ruin what you think of the kit lens IMO.
Click to expand...

I definitely dont have much interest in keeping my kit lens. I would like a L zoom also however.

wuyanxu said:
how about:
Sigma 12-24mm - great lens, works great as WA on crop and Ultra ultra WA on FF.
24-105 f4L - great walk about lens on FF, okay semi-tele on crop.

that would allow a much easier and smoother transfer to the 5D2 you've been eyeing.

I had a sigma 12-24mm, unfortunately it was on Nikon crop, had to painfully sell it to fund a 17-40mm. similar field of view, but wish I can play with that kind of ultra wideness on FF.


do try to get rid of the kit lens, it's really quite bad when you have tried other lenses.
Click to expand...

That's a good suggestion and one I will take on board. The Sigma is looking promising and sounds like a good lens for the money. I already notice now using my nifty fifty how bad the kit lens really is!
 
JakeT1992 said:
Thanks guys! I'm currently waiting to see what my christmas bonus is, and what santa brings me, then I'll hopefully make the purchase between christmas and new year, ready for a long weekend in Venice in january!
Click to expand...

Well, I've not checked the behaviour list yet, so we'll have to see... :rules:

Ho! Ho! Ho!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top