Printable View
I'm going to be going on vacation in June (planning on going to Shanghai) and I'm trying to get my kit situation sorted out before I go. I just bought a 7D with the 28-135 kit lens. I also have a 50mm 1.4 While I'd love to acquire a bunch of L glass in the next two months, my budget just won't allow it. I can probably swing a grand to go towards glass before I go. What would you recommend? A wide angle (Canon or otherwise)? A superzoom? 17-55?
I'd get a 10-22mm and a 70-200mm f/4, it would be a little more than a grand but itwould make a very versitile setup. Your 28-135mm would be a great walk-around lens.
John.
A 70-200 f4 IS USM would be about a grand depending on where you purchase it from. It's very sharp and doesn't attract too much attention.
I'll leave the lens suggestions to other forum members, but I have two big words of advice:
1. DON'T BRING A WHITE LENS. Especially in a country like China (nothing against China, I've been there too) a lens like that might attract too much unfriendly attention.
2. Think about buying a Crumpler photo bag. Their bags are durable and discreet. I use a giant "Karachi Outpost" backpack for my gear, there are smaller ones that might be worth a look.
my 2¢
brendan
If you're happy with your 28-135 in that range, then a 10-22 would complement it well and leave you enough for another prime like the 100mm f/2. If you'd prefer something faster and higher quality than the 28-135, I suggest the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. You could pair it with the EF-S 55-250 for a cheap/light tele.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bburns223
I wouldn't be too worried about this. If you're comfortable shooting at home with a white lens, you should be comfortable shooting anywhere. I'd be more concerned about acting like you're waiting to be ripped off.
Coincidentally, in all my travels I've only ever been ripped off on my trip to the US.
Well, in your situation, here's what I think.
You've got a good walk around lens with the 28-135. You've got a camera with 18 MP, so croping in, is something you can easily do. (I know we all want to crop with the lens, and save all the juicy MP but still) Unless you plan on taking pictures of individual things from a long distance, like a bird on the other mountain, I don't think you're going to need anything too long, and even then, 200mm isn't much of a climb from 135, so you'd either have to get a cheap 300, with worse picture quality, or an expensive 300, which is expensive....hah
If you're in the city, you'll NEVER get cool shots, like you'll get from the 10-22. I've got one (currently on the disabled list thanks to me using a friends tripod and just goofing and it going to the ground) and it just takes amazing city shots. It handles distortion extremely well, and is sharp. When you are at the base of a building, or any other structure, and you tilt the camera up, it just makes everything look like it's towering over you!
Plus, since you can't get very far away from things in the city, the wide angle will allow you to capture more of the scene. Another cool thing about the 10-22, is that if you decide to get brave, and get close to your subject, the results are thrilling! It's not a macro lens. It has NO magnification qualities, but it has a low MFD and the way it exaggerates distances can simply make a picture.
Last but not least,it's a great landscape lens. Due to the 10mm wide end, there's a boat load of depth of field wide open, let alone stoping down. You'll never have to worry about a certain part of the picture being blurry. Want to get a huge cut of that mountain range? Done. The entire city from a short ways away? No problem.
The only thing you want to look out for is portraits with the lens. It makes people look distorted, especially at the widest angles, and on the corners. If you keep zoomed in to 22, it's not so bad. Though, animals are a great subject. Get close to your dog, tounge hanging out, and it just makes for a picture thing brings a smile to your face! You'll get ZERO background blur with this baby, though. It's just not made for that.
So, obviously I'm thinking I'd go 10-22 here. When I got mine, I was blown away with what can be done with the lens. Maybe other than a great macro lens, I don't think there's a more "fun" lens to use out there.
PS: Buying a cheap 300mm lens wouldn't necessarily be a horrible idea, though. As long as you don't expect great IQ, it would at least get you the reach you wanted, for a low price.