If you had €1000 to spend on lenses then .....

leinsterman

Hi,

I recently came into some unexpected money ...

I plan use it to buy something really nice for me ... on this occasion I am going to blow €1000 on lenses to take me up a step up from my existing kit.:o

I currently own -

A new Canon EOS 20d DSLR & old Canon EOS 500

An assortment of lenses including -

• Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6 DC (a average performer I got with 20D pacakge)
• Canon EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 III USM (gets terrible reviews but I love mine even with its flaws)
• SIGMA 28-70mm F2.8-4 (my old SLR lenss ... )
• Tamron 80-210mm F4.5-5.6

OK ... I know... a pretty poor line up of lenses ... hence my decision to do somthing with about this ... I tend to do lots of travel, wildlife and scenery with a little sports (can get side line at Croke park) and portraits for friends and family ...

So the question / challenge I have is how to spend my windfall on lenses to get the most bang for buck ???!!!

A lesson I learnt while on a recent trip to Egypt makes my first choice obvious - a fast prime for indoor work where flash is not allowed/desirable. I will probably go for Canon 50mm f1.8 which is quite cheap at USD75 from B&H. Given the 1.6 conversion factor (50mm = 85mm on 20d) I could use this for portraits and indoor work ...

The next option is to get something which is a step up from Sigma zoom for the 20D - I am considering the Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS ... but I notice some mixed opinions about it and does it really give me more creative options?? ...

I want something that will give me razor sharpness, good low light performance / dept of field options in the 17-200mm range ...

Will proably stick it out with the longer lens (Canon 75-300mm) for wildlife for now ... though this is probably not the best ...

Any good advice is very welcome ... looking through other web pages for inspiration has me driven potty !!



Thanks


Simon

Enygma

Ooh I love spending other peoples money

I'd probably go for a 300/f4 L or the 400/5.6 prime. Or maybe the Sigma 50-500.
You should be able to pick up a 70-200/2.8L for around E1,000 too. lovely lens by all accounts.

I've got the 17-85 IS and I love it, it's my walkabout lens. Lovely range, sharp, IS. Paid $425 for it. That leaves you with about E600 I'd say, the Sigma 70-200/2.8 is meant to be a great performer too.

Progen

Enygma wrote:

Ooh I love spending other peoples money

I'd probably go for a 300/f4 L or the 400/5.6 prime. Or maybe the Sigma 50-500.
You should be able to pick up a 70-200/2.8L for around E1,000 too. lovely lens by all accounts.

I've got the 17-85 IS and I love it, it's my walkabout lens. Lovely range, sharp, IS. Paid $425 for it. That leaves you with about E600 I'd say, the Sigma 70-200/2.8 is meant to be a great performer too.

I recently got a Sigma 28-300mm f3.5-6.3 DG and use it with my Canon EOS 300 DSLR. Love the lens, it's a great all-rounder for shooting. And, I've noticed, at full 300mm its shooting at 5.3 which is weird but I'm not complaining. Think it sells for around 250 euro new!

melekalikimaka

can't go wrong with a nice low apeture 1.8 50mm for 100 euro

alb

melekalikimaka wrote:

can't go wrong with a nice low apeture 1.8 50mm for 100 euro

I agree completely, especially if you're any way interested in portraiture. I'd spend the rest on a nice wide angle, but that's just me

SOL

from my experience, I have a 24-70 2.8 and a 80-200 2.8 and I find that I wouldn't really notice the difference with the wide angle in terms of depth of field but you can get fantastic results from the telephoto... it lets you take brilliant portraits and is great for highlighting subjects. Anyways, just my experience.

rymus

I'd get a Sigma 70-200 2.8 instead of pissing away the extra money on the practically identical canon. What I'd do with the other 400 though.. Having recently got the 50mm 1.8 I'd advise anyone to have it so that another roughly 100 quid. Oh and I'd get a Sigma 1.4x TC for the above 70-200; just for a bit of extra reach when sitting on beaches taking surfing shots. Then, a light monopod and a few pints with the rest to celebrate my purchases

SOL

Maybe a 50mm f1.4 if you have the extra money going round...

leinsterman

SOL wrote:

Maybe a 50mm f1.4 if you have the extra money going round...

Yes I was thinking about the 50mm F1.4 v F1.8 ... I will definitely buy one or the other ... but there is quite a price difference (as much as €200) ... setting the extra f stop and build quality aside ... Is there is big difference in the kind of results you can achieve with the f1.4 over f1.8?

Thanks to everyone for all the advice so far ... this has been a great response and is becoming an interesting debate ... some intriguing suggestions too ... perhaps I am looking at this the wrong way ... I need to think about the end game ... the lens I buy now will form part of a long term line up replacing everything I currently use ... so with that in mind, long term I will need (bearing in my the 1.6 conversion factor of the 20D) -

• a Fast prime for indoor / low light / dept of field / portrait work 50mm = 80mm
• a great walk around / general purpose lens in the 20-100mm (32-160mm) range
• a good wide angle zoom at the 10-24mm (16-38mm) end for scenery and dramatic stuff
• a Longer fast-ish (or at least image stabilised) zoom in the 70-300mm (110-480mm) range for wildlife, sports, people photography
• a 1.4 teleconverter compatible with a much of above as possible

This represents that start of a transition to serious amateur photography for me ... enough dabbling!!

My thinking was - get the cheap and cheerful 50mm f1.8 for now at €95 on www.ac-foto.com ... leaving me €900 to spend on 1 relatively high end lens plus filters and hood (Canon are such a rip off with hoods :mad: ).

My initial choice of walk around lens the Sigma 18-125mm DC was a bad one ... I have had some pleasing results with it, but it is too soft and hunts way too much for my liking ... so perhaps I need to bite the bullet a get a good quality replacement for the walk around. This will leave me with gaps but it is always good to want more :rolleyes:

currently looking at -

Canon 17-85mm IS (leaving some spare change @ €449)
Canon 24-105mm IS f4.0L (second hand or blowing the €1000 budget)
Canon 24-70 f2.8L (ditto)


Though I am very intrigued at the suggestion of Sigma 70-200mm ... it goes against my original thinking ... but I like the idea !!

Thanks all (once again) ... more advice is welcome from anyone ... what is a good basic lens line up for the Canon EOS 20D and subsequent (better) camera bodies ??


Simon

rymus

For wide angle stuff, you may want to consider the Sigma 10-20. I got one a few months back and so far am very pleased with it.

Oriel

I too would advise getting the 50mm f/1.8. The small DOF in difficult enough to handle on the 1.8, I wouldn't like to see what it's like on the 1.4. Fair enough, you get the slightly larger aperture, but I personally don't think that it's worth the extra £130.

Oriel

Also, here's a comparison between the 1.4 and 1.8:
http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

heffsarmy

Based on technikdirekt.de, this will blow your budget, 1138 + shipping, I'd get the canon 50mm 1.8mm(94euro), tamron 17-35mm f2.8-f4(349euro) and the canon fixed 200mm f2.8(695), these lens are excellent performers for the price, the 200mm prime is sharper than any of the 70-200mm on the market. heres review from users on the 3 lenses. If your travelling to the US then you could get this for 1000euro

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=30&sort=7&thecat=2
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=37&sort=7&cat=2&page=2
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=245&sort=7&cat=43&page=1

rymus

try those prices at http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Kea-Photo too

leinsterman

rymus wrote:

For wide angle stuff, you may want to consider the Sigma 10-20. I got one a few months back and so far am very pleased with it.

I was trying similar message thread at www.photographyreview.com and the Sigma 10-20 is coming up trumps there too ...

I also spoke to a pro photographer friend and he says "get yourself a wide angle" for the outdoor landscapes ...

Truth be told ... this is good advice but has upset my plan which was to add a few bob and go for the 24-105mm F4L ...

My limited experience with Sigma thus far has been bad ... but the lens does get some good reviews ... Do you have any examples of yours posted anywhere ? Why did you pick it over the Canon equivalent ?

Thanks

Simon

rabbitinlights

Id trump up for a sigma 10-20 (or maybe the canon!), I had a blast on one last week and I am currently saving my pennies!

leinsterman

Anyone got any experience with the Sigma EX series of lenses ?

How do they compare to Canon ?

I am particularly interested in -

Sigma EX 24- 70/2.8 DG MACRO & EX 10-20/4-5.6 DC

thanks

S

EireRoadUser

Sorry leinster ,I only seen this post just now .
The lense you asked about the 24-70 is like a brick.

I'd say the only enjoyment anyone would get would be from a tripod with it.
It's very noisy aswell ,sounds like a RC car.

Pictures are very clear though ,nice crisp images but the bulk makes it impractical for anything but tripods.

EDIT : Focus ring is a pain also ,has to be pulled back etc ,can't remember exactly how it's done ,about 3 months since i had it for weekend . I used it when it came out up in powerscourt

rymus

leinsterman; if you're looking for examples of Sigma lenses, my flickr account is full of em. My two most used lenses are a 24-70 2.8 and the 10-20.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rymus

In fact, there's alot in the Ross Castle set that were shot with that combo. Ignore the blog awards set, that was mostly a canon 50mm 1.8

Zombrex

rymus wrote:

leinsterman; if you're looking for examples of Sigma lenses, my flickr account is full of em. My two most used lenses are a 24-70 2.8 and the 10-20.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rymus

In fact, there's alot in the Ross Castle set that were shot with that combo. Ignore the blog awards set, that was mostly a canon 50mm 1.8

Very nice portraits from the blog awards Rymus. Very natural looking, none of this "Everyone smile, smile, ok, hold it, hold it, hold it, ok!" type of shots

I most pick up the Canon 50mm for portraits ... at €100 I really have no excuse not to.

rymus

cheers. Most of them were shot while drinking a pint and not looking through the viewfinder so I'm pretty happy with them.

paudie

I reckon I'd try to stretch the budget a little and go with the 70-200 F4L and the sigma 18-50 f2.8. The sigma is designed for the 1.6x so it stays at 18.

I have the canon and it's beautiful

EireRoadUser

anyone know if the 17-70mm sigma lense is stocked anywhere in dublin ,
couldn't seem to find anyone with one but was told i could order it.

It's going to retail for 320 euro and it's compared to the 18-50 EX DC

The 17-70 is DC and macro and starts at 2.8 going down to 4.5.

leinsterman

rymus wrote:

leinsterman; if you're looking for examples of Sigma lenses, my flickr account is full of em. My two most used lenses are a 24-70 2.8 and the 10-20.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rymus

In fact, there's alot in the Ross Castle set that were shot with that combo. Ignore the blog awards set, that was mostly a canon 50mm 1.8

yikes .. placed the order for the 24-70 last week along with the 12-24 ... seen the wide angle at Conns and it looks pretty good ... a little concerned at the comments of eireroaduser concering its suitability as a walk around (I think the exact words were "like a brick" ... what would you say ?

Had a look at your blog too ... some nice sharp pics ...

leinsterman

EireRoadUser wrote:

Sorry leinster ,I only seen this post just now .
The lense you asked about the 24-70 is like a brick.

:eek: ... probably too late ... though Ac-foto have a pretty good return policy so I can always swap it for something else ... will give it a go a see how I feel ...

EireRoadUser

I could be very wrong leinster ,apologies if i am .
Maybe the lense i had was the 24-60

One thing for sure was I got my hands on it just after it came out around september last year and it had macro on it at 2.8

My hands aren't very big ,but i found my 350D was being ripped apart if i held the camera with one hand.

It's a fabulous lense otherwise ,amazing clarity.
BTW leinster ,sorry about getting a little ruffled on the camera bag thread, thanks for your help on it.

EireRoadUser

sorry for posting again ,but i just checked AC photos price .
When i had the same lense it was well over 600 euro and the price made me stay clear.
I cannot believe the lense is 429 now, thats a lot of glass for that price ,I would have kept the lense at that price.

leinsterman

EireRoadUser wrote:

sorry for posting again ,but i just checked AC photos price .
When i had the same lense it was well over 600 euro and the price made me stay clear.
I cannot believe the lense is 429 now, thats a lot of glass for that price ,I would have kept the lense at that price.

LOL ... You wouldn't be trying to make me feel better about my new toys having previously dissed it ... now would you ??

EireRoadUser

No seriously ,it was 630 euro at the time.

I really didn't want to bring it back as macro shots were a joy ,and the angle was great aswell.
I couldn't justify the money for a non HSM lense thats all ,I mean thats whats sigma's about quality at a good price.

leinsterman

EireRoadUser wrote:

No seriously ,it was 630 euro at the time.

I really didn't want to bring it back as macro shots were a joy ,and the angle was great aswell.
I couldn't justify the money for a non HSM lense thats all ,I mean thats whats sigma's about quality at a good price.

Cool ... can't wait to have a play with it then ... it is currently being delayed at AC-Foto by a lack of stock for a 50mm 1.8 (order was for 12-24 Sigma, 24-70mm, 50mm 1.8 and filters ...)

One big drawback of the 24-70 is the filter size at 82 mm ... the basic UV is about €50 but the polariser is mad money at €125!!!

Any recommendations for a good site to buy filters ?

EireRoadUser

I don't ,things like that i'd probably go for on ebay.