Advice - What lens should I go with?
- Thread starter atmax1
- Start date
The 70-200 f4 is brilliant. But f4 is f4 and you have to work around it sometimes.
The 70-200 f2.8 is better and one of the staple Canon lenses, but is expensive of course and I would say you should really know deep down whether you need one and not consider it alongside two very different lenses IMO.
The 24-105 is an odd 3rd choice. You need to decide what you need in a lens and what you'll be shooting. Do you need a telephoto or a general purpose zoom?
The 70-200 f2.8 is better and one of the staple Canon lenses, but is expensive of course and I would say you should really know deep down whether you need one and not consider it alongside two very different lenses IMO.
The 24-105 is an odd 3rd choice. You need to decide what you need in a lens and what you'll be shooting. Do you need a telephoto or a general purpose zoom?
If you're asking the question if you need f2.8 or f4 then you probably don't need the f2.8 version
The f4 is an nice sharp and light lens, the f2.8 is larger and heavier but gives you that f2.8... I really don't like the 24-105 so I'll abstain from commenting on that!What other lenses do you have, and what is it you want to shoot?
Thanks for the post guys, I have a kit 18-55mm lens, 50mm 1.8 (plan to get the 1.4 soon), sigma 10-20mm and Canon 55-250mm but I mostly use the 50mm.
My flickr is here for an idea of what I shoot, I was thinking about the 24-105 or a Canon EF 17-40mm F4 L as a walk about lens but I did read people don't like the 24-105 on a crop sensor.. but than I ended up looking at the 70-200 f2.8 /f4 as I thought it would be a nice change but I guess a better question would be what lens do you think would suit me best?
My flickr is here for an idea of what I shoot, I was thinking about the 24-105 or a Canon EF 17-40mm F4 L as a walk about lens but I did read people don't like the 24-105 on a crop sensor.. but than I ended up looking at the 70-200 f2.8 /f4 as I thought it would be a nice change but I guess a better question would be what lens do you think would suit me best?
I've got the 70-200 F4 non IS and it's a GREAT lens, especially when you consider the price. I really need to sort out the tags on my flickr account so I can link by lens! I've taken a few really nice shots with that lens. On a crop you can get some nice reach from it, thus saving you from needing an extender 
July moon by Niall Allen, on Flickr
Trumpet jazz by Niall Allen, on Flickr
The grand hotel by Niall Allen, on Flickr
Also, the Sigma 50mm 1.4 lens is THE 50mm lens to get. It's awesome. I won't flood here with more images, but have a nose on flickr (not just mine, I'm rubbish) and you'll be sold on that lens.
July moon by Niall Allen, on Flickr
Trumpet jazz by Niall Allen, on Flickr
The grand hotel by Niall Allen, on Flickr
Also, the Sigma 50mm 1.4 lens is THE 50mm lens to get. It's awesome. I won't flood here with more images, but have a nose on flickr (not just mine, I'm rubbish
) and you'll be sold on that lens.
I've had almost the exact same lenses as you.
I sold my Sigma 10-20mm and replaced it with a 17-40 f4L, replaced my 50mm 1.8 with the 1.4 and have the 70-200 f4L. The 50 1.4 is on the camera the most of the time.
I have a 5D though so it's slightly different for me. The 17-40 on a crop is actually a very good outdoor general purpose lens and not very expensive (I stick it on my 500D sometimes)
Is the 70-200mm 2.8 non IS weather sealed? and I think I will have to take a look at the sigma 50mm 1.4 and compare to the canon version, I will also look at the 16-35.
I plan to do pity much the same thing, I want the 16-35 or 17-40mm change up the 50mm to a 1.4 as I love my fifty lol and I plan to get a 5D MK III sometime in the next few years most likely.
I feel like I should pick up a 70-200mm f2.8L and get a 50mm 1.4 in a few months, or get the 16-35 or 17-40mm so I ca
I plan to do pity much the same thing, I want the 16-35 or 17-40mm change up the 50mm to a 1.4 as I love my fifty lol and I plan to get a 5D MK III sometime in the next few years most likely.
I feel like I should pick up a 70-200mm f2.8L and get a 50mm 1.4 in a few months, or get the 16-35 or 17-40mm so I ca
To be honest I wouldn't worry to much about buying lenses for a camera you might get in a couple of years. I'd buy a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 over a 17-40L any day on a crop, or even the 17-55 IS if you're feeling flush.
The two lenses you are deciding between do completely different jobs. I don't think you'd be disappointed with either, so just decide which you want first
The two lenses you are deciding between do completely different jobs. I don't think you'd be disappointed with either, so just decide which you want first
I'd get the 16-35 over the 17-40. Still, people seem to like both so who's to say which is better? For me the 16-35 is better, but both seem to have their positives and negatives.
Personally, I find that having a shorter lens is better as a walk about, but if you're in an open area, I have a 50mm attached with a 12-24 and 70-200 in the bag.
Personally, I find that having a shorter lens is better as a walk about, but if you're in an open area, I have a 50mm attached with a 12-24 and 70-200 in the bag.