What should my lens purchase be???

[ddt0725]

Ok, now that I finally have my tripod/ballhead issue taken care of, I'm ready to "focus" on what my next lens purchase should be [:O]!
I enjoy taking a variety of photos...macro, wildlife, landscapes, portraits and fast-action being my 3 dogs (blink and their gone) and toddler grandbabies.I live by LakeMichigan and am looking forward to taking pictures this spring/summer ofsunrises and our beautiful new marina (during the day & at night).


I am looking a few lenses as high possibilities ...
CanonEF 70-200 f/2.8LIS
Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS
Canon EF 24-105 f/4 L IS

Currently own ....

Canon Rebel T1i (hopefully moving to a a 7D or T2i soon)
Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS
Canon 1.4x II Extender
Kenko extension tube set
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS& EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS [+o(]


Any suggestions on what lens to add next (Canon or good IQ non-Canon) greatly appreciated!

Denise

[Brendan7]

Hi Denise,


Cross the 24-105 off your list. It's built for a full-frame body and on a 1.6 FOVCF it's rather blah. If you don't shoot indoor sports you don't need the 70-200 f/2.8, the lighter, sharper and far less expensive 70-200 f/4IS is a great lens. the 17-55 may be your best bet. The 10-22 might be a nice choice for landscapes. I'd use your 100 macro for portraits, you don't need another portrait lens IMHO.

Ok, now that I finally have my tripod/ballhead issue taken care of, I'm ready to "focus" on what my next lens purchase should be [img]/emoticons/emotion-3.gif[/img]!

Only you can answer that. What is missing in your kit? I see only one hole: landscapes. And so, I'll recommend the 10-22 as the next lens. Now, if you buy that, a 7D, and a macro flash you'll have spend $2400 more on gear. If that's no problem for you, then fine, order it today. But I think you need to know your priorities. When you shoot with your current gear, what do you wish you had? Narrow it down from there. And remember that no gear will take good pictures. You take good pictures. Don't think "OK, what next to buy?". Think, I have a problem here. Is it me, my subjects, or the camera? Go from there. Know your priorities and you will end up spending a whole lot less money. Don't buy a tripod because others say you need one. Buy a tripod because you feel a genuine need for sharper photographs.


In this case, either 17-55 or a 10-22 makes sense from what I know about your needs, which is not much. Can you explain what you think you're missing in your kit?


brendan

[Superman]

I agree with Brendan, the thing I see missing most is the wide end. If you are looking at staying with 1.6 fovcf then the 10-22 would be a great addition to what you have now. 24-105 is a great general purpose lens (and a lens I almost cough up dough for yesterday) but it is better suited to a FF body. I am also currently a T1i user but I am looking to get the 5dmkII soon, just waiting to see if any new of a mkIII comes out. Out of curiosity, have you considered a FF? If not I am just curious as to why. Might help with my decision too.


Anyway my only other thought on what you should go with is - if you plan to stick to 1.6 then the 17-55 is awesome too and wide enough for most - that being said the 10-22 really is perfect for landscapes.


Clark

[Daniel Browning]

I second the recommendations for an ultrawide. Of the choices given, I think I'd recommend the 17-55. The f-number is much faster than the kit lens, and most people use this angle of view a lot. On the other hand, if you are more of a telephoto person and you like compressed portraits, the 70-200 f/2.8 L would be excellent. It's certainly a much bigger and heavier lens. Build quality, focus, etc. are a step up.

[wickerprints]

If your interest is in obtaining a focal length / aperture combination that you don't have at present, then get a zoom. If your interest is in maximal image quality, get a fast L prime. In either case, you'll benefit most from a wide angle. This gives you possibilities such as the EF-S 10-22 (as mentioned), or for something a little more exciting...


TS-E 17/4, 14/2.8L II, 24/1.4L II, TS-E 24/3.5L II...


Of course, none of these lenses are cheap but if you did splash out on a TS-E...wow.


As for the 70-200/2.8L IS (either Mark I or the upcoming Mark II), that's not a cheap lens. If that's under consideration then so should the 14/2.8L and definitely the 24/1.4L. I'll be honest--once I got the 100/2.8L macro IS and the 300/4L IS, my 70-200/2.8L IS doesn't get to see a lot of light these days. Had I known this would happen I probably would have purchased the 300/2.8L IS instead of the 300/4.

[ddt0725]

Cross the 24-105 off your list. It's built for a full-frame body and on a 1.6 FOVCF it's rather blah. If you don't shoot indoor sports you don't need the 70-200 f/2.8, the lighter, sharper and far less expensive 70-200 f/4IS is a great lens. the 17-55 may be your best bet. The 10-22


Only you can answer that. What is missing in your kit? I see only one hole: landscapes. And so, I'll recommend the 10-22 as the next lens. Now, if you buy that, a 7D, and a macro flash you'll have spend $2400 more on gear. If that's no problem for you, then fine, order it today. But I think


In this case, either 17-55 or a 10-22 makes sense from what I know about your needs, which is not much. Can you explain what you think you're missing in your kit?


brendan



<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

I think right now I am leaning toward the 17-55. I still have to check out the 10-22 (thanks for the info) and a few others suggestions I've been given. As far as what I feel I'm lacking currently ...my two lenses that came with my camera I'd like to replace with better IQ lenses. I guess looking at it more carefully, yes a nice landscape lens would be very beneficial.


BTW - I just sold my camera on ebay []! So, I have to decide between the 7D and waiting a month or so for the T2i! Not being a patient person ...a month without a camera is a LONG time...I feel withdrawal pains already! [:P]


Denise

[Brendan7]

In that case, don't get a lens, and buy a 5D Mark II. That's my suggestion.

[ddt0725]

Out of curiosity, have you considered a FF? If not I am just curious as to why. Might help with my decision too.


Anyway my only other thought on what you should go with is - if you plan to stick to 1.6 then the 17-55 is awesome too and wide enough for most - that being said the 10-22 really is perfect for landscapes.


Clark
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

Hi Clark,


I never really considered a FF, mostly due to price I guess. I'd rather spend the $$$ on lenses and accessories. I have a lot of suggestions here to look at so I have my researching cut out for me tonight! I have scratched the 24-105 off the list at least!


Thanks for your help,


Denise

[ddt0725]

I second the recommendations for an ultrawide. Of the choices given, I think I'd recommend the 17-55. The f-number is much faster than the kit lens, and most people use this angle of view a lot. On the other hand, if you are more of a telephoto person and you like compressed portraits, the 70-200 f/2.8 L would be excellent. It's certainly a much bigger and heavier lens. Build quality, focus, etc. are a step up.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

the 17-55 is looking like the winner here! I just sold my camera so now I have that to figure out too!

Thank you for your recommendation Daniel...very much appreciated!


Denise

[Brendan7]

Definitely look at FF. Now that you've sold your T1i a 5D2 makes a ton of sense. It may keep you from more glass, but Denise, I can really tell you you have a great kit and have chosen some very nice equipment that doesn't need much improvement. I think that you should go 1) 5D2 and then 2) wideangle zoom lens &ndash; 17-40l is very nice. But don't rush any purchases and take some more photos!


brendan