Need advice on lens choices

[quattrophinia]

Hello,


I'm new to this forum and was wondering if someone(s) could help me choose between theCanon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L IS USM & theCanon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS


I am an amateur photographer and upgrading to a 50D from a Digital Rebel and will also be purchasing aCanon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM - I am leaning towards the 70-200mm


I mostly shoot landscape, architecture, moving water like waterfalls and special effects like motion trails from car lights at night.


I realize that they are very different but would love any feedback.





Thank you...





quattrophinia


[]

[ShutterbugJohan]

I'd definately get the 70-200/4 IS


:-)

[I chase light]

I agree. If for no other reason, choose the "L"lens becauseit is commonly accepted that a lens witha smaller ratio between focal lengthswill bebetter.

[Rob Gardner]

The 70-200 f/4 L IS really *is* the best zoom Canon makes, in terms of both overall sharpness and performance. I still regret selling my last one - so much for doing friends favours....

[Sean Setters]

The 70-200 f/4 L IS hands down. I have a 50D, the 17-55 f/2.8 IS and the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS and it's a great combo. However, I will advise that you get the 17-55 first. Honestly, the 17-55 stays on my camera about 90% of the time. The focal range tends to be a hell of alot more useful than the long reach of the 70-200 when paired with a crop sensor. Don't get me wrong, the 70-200 produces great pictures, but its extra long reach tends to be a downside for my kind of shooting. When reach is needed, it's a fantastic tool to have. However, from what you've said, I think you'll probably get the more use out of the 17-55 like I do.

[gunslinge]

I like to shoot some of the same stuff, and use a wide angle lens alot, think about the 10-22 zoom, I would alway choose a "L series lens" ie 70-200mm over any non-L series, after getting two, a 24-105 L and a 100-400 L, I put by old lens in the closet and have not used them since.

[quattrophinia]

Thank you to all of you, it's greatly appreciated...

[greggf]

for what it's worth, the 18-200 is a great walk around lens, a 'one-lens-does-it-all', so you might be happy in that respect. The optics aren't going to compare with the other two lenses you're considering purchasing, but, they also don't haave the range. OTOH, nothing compares to 70-200 f4IS, as far as I am concerned. a fantastic lens, and I do mean FANTASTIC! It is a little long on a crop, so you will need a shorter lens(like you are thinking of purchasing). The 17-55IS is agood lens,but it is very, very pricey(considering it's not an "L"). In that respect, I would consider the Tamron 17-50. The optics are just as good as the 17-55IS, and costs half as much, therefore saving you money in the long run(possibly to buy a prime(Sigma 30 1.4 comes to mind). Another option, also, is the Canon 17-40 f4 L, which loses some length, a stop, but is alot cheaper, has great optics, and would work very good for what you are considering doing. You could also rent any of these lenses(lensrental.com), and come up with your own informed decision, which will give you a great hands on experience!! Thanx for listening, Gregg.

[quattrophinia]

Thank you for that Gregg, good points..

[Madison]

Gregg: The 17-55 may not be 'L' but have you seen the pictures? Many reviewers say it is absolutely L quality. The quality of the 17-55 2.8 is through the roof. It's the weather sealing that breaks the L deal but in terms of image quality I was blown away.


Check out the review:


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-f-2.8-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx


Let me quote: 'As it turns out, my 17-55 matches or exceeds the optical performance of my L-Series zooms in this similar focal length range ...'





So it is well worth the price and investment. (And I am sorry to say but I didn't think the Tamron you mention in your post is nearly as good as you make it out to be. It's cheaper, but the quality is far less than the 17-55). (And yes, I had both lenss when I shot with a crop body). Just my two cents.