Help with gear choice/priority

Hi All,


I'm a new member and newbie to photography, and have been reading a lot of posts here on the forum. I've had my Rebel XS and kit lens EFS 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 IS for over a year, and primarily take photos of my pets, a little bit of landscape, and a little macro too. I just took a beginner class, and am shooting in manual mode more. I have a nifty fifty (50mm 1.8) on the way, as it has wider aperture, it was reasonably priced, and I'm usually on the 55mm end of my lens alot of the time.


I have to say this is a really thoughtful and helpful group, but with all the info and beautiful photos, I've developed a severe case of "want it". Unfortunately, budget doesn't really match my list of wants, so I'm trying to sort out which items I should go with next. For my next lens, I want a longer zoom, and was thinking the 70-200 L f4 IS would be awesome, while still not being as heavy or expensive as the 2.8 IS version.I like the IS feature of my current lens, since I don't like lugging a tripod around. I also considered the 70-300 L, but it costs quite a bit more, plus not sure if the extra 100mm of zoom with variable aperture is a better trade off than the constant f4 of the other lens. Does the 1.4 extender work with the f4 lens well, and is that a decent alternative to the 70-300?


If I decide to go crazy and order a second lens, should I replace my kit with another general zoom? I've seen several posts recommending the EFS 17-55 f2.8 IS. Originally, since I already have a lens with this range I was thinking an upgrade to body would be better as the next purchase. But I also have read enough "glass first" posts, that I may have changed my mind.


I'd also love to upgrade my camera body, and since I have no need or desire to go FF, I am torn between the 60D and 7D. From my reading, I know that the 60D doesn't have the micro-adjust, but its other features are appealing to me (including the video which is actually a nice addition for me). The 7D seems to have many fans here, but the price difference of $600 plus the need for a new CF memory card is a bit steep. Either body would be an upgrade in fps, auto-focus, sensor, etc. Is the micro-adjust really that important? I don't have it now, but I also don't have any quality glass that the need would be obvious yet.


So, my dilemma is deciding on how high I want to run up my debt, and if I do want to order 1 or 2 lenses, and possibly a camera body too. I'm not opposed to refurbished/used gear, but the rebates right now also make this choice just a tad bit harder.


Any and all suggestions and opinions are welcome. Thanks for reading!


-Carrie

vizt,


I think your first choice is spot on, the 70-200mm f4 IS is about the best lens canon has ever made. It works VERY well with the 1.4 II extender, at f5.6, and remains very sharp. It would be my first choice of all lenses, and your choice of the EFS 17-55mm f2.8 would most definitely be my second. Once you have these two lenses, you are pretty much set for life.


Once you have both, you can retire the kit lens for 75 bucks on ebay or Craigslist and be happy.


I would definitely hold off on a new body till you have these two lenses, as they work very well on the Rebel

Hi Carrie and welcome to the forum,


Generally you are better off to upgrade the glass before the body, unless you are looking to do something your current body does not do well, for example shoot fast moving sports.


The EF 70-200mm f/4<span style="color: #ff0000;"] L IS USM is an outstanding lens. The EF-S 17-55mm IS USM is considered by many, including me, to be the best general purpose APS-C lens Canon makes. As MacManUS correctly points out you will be set for quite a long time with this pair. The only thing that would affect their service to you is if you were to go to a full frame or APS-H sensor body, in which case the 17-55 would not work with those bodies. It sounds like you are no where close to one of those bodies, but I mention it as full disclosure. In addition, I own the EF-S 17-55mm IS USM and the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 <span style="color: #ff0000;"]L IS USM. I love them both and they are two of my most used lenses (my 50D typically is paired with the 17-55 in the ready-to-go mode). Having said that, <span style="color: #ff0000;"]L lenses are kind of like Lays Potato Chips, you do not stop at one.


I have the f/2.8 version of the 70-200 because I frequently shoot in low light and I need the wider aperture. If your needs do not require the wider aperture, the savings by going with the f/4 version will cover a good part of the 17-55. As to the above mentioned 7D II, well it does not currently exist and may not be available this year, next year or ever. If you need and can afford and will use a camera like the 7D, buy it when you can, unless Canon has announced a release date for a newer model. Until then, it does not exist in the real world. I went through a similar situation last spring when I wanted a 5D II for better low light performance at my daughters dance recital. I bought the 5D II and have used it a lot. And I LOVE it. Would I like a better AF system and some of the things those waiting for the 5D III are waiting for, of course I would. But, I would have missed a lot of shots and I would still be waiting. In short, that is my advice for your lenses and whatever else you are thinking of, make a list of the ones you will use in the order you would need them and work from that list. Then you adjust you list as your needs change and new releases of gear come along.


A couple of final thoughts, I mention the 7D and not the 60D as I look at the 60D as more of a super Rebel than the successor to the 50D. The 7D is for all intents and purpose the upgrade to the 50D and Canon made that point with the release of the 60D. As you hone your skills and you get better lenses, AF Microadjust will become more important to you, especially if you go with wider aperture lenses with their accompanying shallower depth of field. And the 7D does video as well. You mention the new 70-300, and whether the extra 100mm is worth it depends on what you are going to need. You need to be more specific with a need to get a recommendation of one over the other. The 1.4 extender will work with the 70-200 lenses, but it will NOT work with the 70-300. I would highly recommend both the 17-55 and the 70-200, which one to get first would depend on which one you would use the most. Which ever one you are going to use the most should be the first one you get followed by the second one. With those two lenses you will have great general purpose coverage.


Chris

Most new photographers tend to crave for the best camera and lenses their money can buy in as short time as possible. This is understandable, but not necessary. As a matter of fact, from my almost 40 years of experience as a photographer, I can assure you, that that approach is a big waste of money, and sometimes, it leads to early disappointment in freshly acquired passion/hobby.


I used to have that fever, too. I spent a lot too much time calculating and recalculating my modest budget, comparing cameras and lenses and imagining how wonderful it would be to be a millionaire. Those were just dreams that almost led me into a corner with no way out. Fortunately, I grew out of this silliness and started using my single body and single (standard) lens. Instead of improving my equipment, I was improving my understanding of how the light works and how to compose my photos.


In my days as a pro photographer, I had opportunity to use THE best photographic equipment from Hasselblad, Linhof, Zeiss, Mamiya etc. After a short while, none of that equipment excited me more than a fact that I was able to compose and shoot a photo with a simple outfit I used for many years (Olympus OM 2 with 50mm/1.4 and 135/3.5 lenses).


My recommendation is, therefore: use what you got right now and try to excel at that. Only when you start feeling like your present equipment is limiting your abilities to grow as a photographer and to enjoy your creativity, do a little research on your own. There will be more must-have photo gear and you will be confident enough to buy exactly what you need. Photography is about a vision, not about tools.

I remember reading this little parable from years ago while studying art and photography, which has stuck with me ever since:


Many years ago I was attending a photographic exhibit by the LIFE photojournalist Alfred Eisenstsadt. He was there along with the usual crowd of luminaries, critics, and photography lovers.


A father and son came up to him and asked, "Mr. Eisenstadt, what kind of camera do you use?"


"A Leica" Eisie replied.


"Son," responded the father, "I

Firestarter, I agree with you almost 100%[Y]


just one thing I have some different point of view.


most of the time, buying a good lens is not a big waste of money. good lenses hold their value and this is the beauty of this hobby IMO. spending more time to find a good deal is more important than thinking which lens to buy, if you don't like the lens you bought, simply resell it for a little loss or profit. used or refurbished it doesn't matter to me, timing is very important, jumping in a new issued lens usually will end up with paying too much....


BTW, isn't that camera gears tax deductible for the pro?

Thanks to all of you for the thoughtful replies. I appreciate the confirmation on the lens choices, as well as the sensible suggestion to wait. I

Carrie, Welcome to the forum. Let me first say that I think your current choices would suit general needs very well and MacManUs was dead on in his recommendations. But here is some food for thought--Before buying, think seriously about the type of photography your interested in, Then make your choices based on your needs/desires. For Example: if you are interested in wildlife or birds,or large field sportsthen the 70-200 probably will not make you happy and you will immediately start shopping again. With me, I was most interested wildlife, so my first lens was a used 100-400L. About a year later I realized I did need a wider general purpose/walk around lens, so I bought the 24-105L. That was 3 years ago and those are the two lenses that are on my camera 99.9% of the time.And I am very happy with my decision. I do have a 10-22, but rarely use it; and I will soon buy the 100L macro. Anyway, the point to all of this is think about what you want to shoot then buyequipment accordingly.Once you get one good lens that you used most often, You may realize that other equipment is more important than more glass and/or bodies, i.e. tripod, flash etc. Until then, Shoot, Shoot, Shoot.


Good luck,


Bob

Carrie,


See how you really enjoy photography and what you want to do. Not everyone needs the newest/latest/greatest body or every L lens that Canon puts out. Unless you are determined that you absolutely must have the newest body, your Rebel will do just fine.


As for lenses. A photographer can cover 98% of things with just 3 lenses: a wide angle zoom, a telephoto zoom and a 50mm or similar prime. These do not have to be L grade or high zoot ef-s lenses. I highly suggest taking a look at Tokina. They are built just as well as any Canon lens out there and Tokina provides the lens elements for many other manufactures. A simple extension tube kit will get you between .50 - 1.4X magnification with your 50mm.


On used gear: I buy used almost exclusively. Yes, I can buy new and get a higher work expense deduction as a business expense, but I would rather save the extra money. Look at KEH.com, BH Photo Used section and Adorama Used section, in that order. All three will allow you to return the gear if it doesn

I agree with Firestarter that photography is, at its core, about vision and art -- and not about tools. Developing your artistic talent is crucial.


BUT it would be a mistake to discount the value of the equipment that you use. I started with a Canon XS, the kit lens, and the EF-S 55-250, but quickly grew frustrated by the following:


1. Poor performance in low light (body and lenses)


2. Middling sharpness especially at the long end of the telephoto.


3. Slow burst rate of the XS.


Sure, a great photographer can compose a great shot with any lens; and without inspired composition, sharpness, f stops, etc. don't matter much. But great lenses make it so much easier to get a pleasing final result.


My first real lens upgrade was the EF 50 f/1.4, and then the 70-200 f/4 IS that you mentioned. No matter how well I compose a shot, the cheap telephoto can't compete with the 70-200 (except, I guess, from 200-250!).


BTW, Bob Williams' suggestion to think hard about the type of photography you do is really important. Exactly as he cautioned, and despite being an amazing lens, my 70-200 just isn't long enough for the nature/wildlife photography that I would like to be doing. I shoot at 200mm so often, and often have to crop in. Here's an example. The coyote was just in my neighbor's yard. From my sliding door, at 200mm, I was frustratingly far away. I cropped it in probably 20% just to get this image.


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/1024x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/8/2287.IMG_5F00_8891.jpg[/img]


Good luck!