if you could buy any 3 lenses what would you buy?

Rich A · Apr 16, 2003

I have some money to blow over the next few months on lenses and are pondering which ones to buy. But want to get the most bang for the buck. So no 6000.00 ones. If you had to start from scratch what would you buy to cover as much as possible with 3-5 lenses. And if you have time why would you buy it. Maybe if you could rank as most important downward.

I currently have a 10D and a 70-200 IS, 1.4x, and soon a wide angle. What would you choose? Which one do you enjoy/use the most.

Thanks, this will help me as well as others who have a 10D and are pondering which lens to buy.
--
Rich

ScottAllen · Apr 16, 2003

16-35 2.8L would be one of my three.

Scott

HowieB · Apr 16, 2003

16-35L 2.8
24-70L 2.8
70-200L IS 2.8
50 1.4
100 Macro
1.4x

Range, low light, sharpness/contrast, flexibility.

Ben Jacobsen · Apr 16, 2003

16~35mm 2.8L
24~70mm 2.8L
100~400mm IS L

and then if you still have some $$$$
100 mm 2.8 macro
50mm 1.4

Ray Chen · Apr 16, 2003

1. 24-70mm f/2.8L
2. 70-200mm f/2.8L IS + 1.4 x
3. 135mm f/2.0L or 85mm f/1.8
4. 15mm f/2.8 fisheye
5. 100mm f/2.8 or 180mm f/3.5L macro

Sorry, but they are for my 1.3x crop camera. For a 10D, I would probably switch out the fisheye for a 16-35mm f/2.8L.

--
Ray Chen

Simon Watkins · Apr 16, 2003

Having just moved over from a Minolta film SLR system and Minolta Dimage 7i, this is what I've gone for as my ideal set:

16-35Lf2.8
24-70L f2.8
70-200L F4
100mm Macro USM

And I've just ordered the 300mm F4 IS USM.

Will probably get the 1.4x convertor eventually, but doubt I'll buy any more lenses over and above the above, though a 50mm 1.4 might eventually tempt me.

I originally bought the 28-135 IS instead of the L glass, but am selling that as I can't justify keeping that and the L zooms as it probably won't get used. That's pretty much my perfect set of lenses.

Simon

--
My Minolta Dimage 7i pics:

http://www.pbase.com/siwatkins

Mike · Apr 16, 2003

full range:
Sigma 15-30mm/3.5-4.5 EX DG ASPH
Sigma 28-70mm/2.8 EX ASPH DF
Sigma 70-200mm/2.8 EX IF APO HSM

Specials:
Canon 50mm/1.4 USM
Sigma 180mm/3.5 EF IF HSM Macro
Canon 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS USM

Ben Jacobsen · Apr 16, 2003

He already has the 70~200 IS so why would he buy another one...
Ben

If money is no object in this quest I would say stick to the canons,
Canon 16~35mm 2.8L
Canon 24~70 2.8L
Canon 100~400 IS L

but if money is a potential issue I would go with Mike and say:
Sigma 15~30mm
Sigma 28~70mm 2.8
Sigma 50~500mm

Wynn Aker · Apr 16, 2003

Went through the exact same questions and rationale myself. I started from scratch with EF series lenses with new 10D, and ended up with 3 lenses. Below, and why:

24-70L - Most used walkaround lens, exclusive indoor lens, good portrait lens at 50-70mm and stopped down. My 10D has this lens on it 90% of the time, with a 550EX.

70-200 f/2.8L (non-IS). Outdoor versatility, general outdoor use. You can catch almost anything outdoors with this, with the exception of distant sports. If you take High School sports pics, 200mm is about right, you can put plenty in the frame, and crop what you want. Any more is almost too much if you're close to the action. Very versatile. I just now wish that I had bought the IS, after finding how valuable it is in my 3rd lens,

300mm f/2.8L IS - Reach out and touch someone. Yes, it's expensive, but it's beautiful. I debated the f/4 vs. the f/2.8, and decided that I regretted being cheap with the 70-200 non-IS, so I wasn't going to be cheap on the 300. It's fast as hell. Used it last night shooting a baseball game, and I positioned myself along the 1st base line (but back a bit!), so that I could catch the batter's box, first base and second base if I whirled the head around. Perfect framing for the batter's box, perfect framing for second base, WAAAY too close for much of a picture at first base, but if a man's on first, and the pitcher tries a pick-off move, it's perfect for moving to the bag, and catching the tag or the runner's body/face as he's trying to get back to the first base bag. The 10D focuses FAST in AF when going from batter's box to first, or to second. FAST. Did I say FAST?

I used to shoot with a Minolta D7. It could never have done what the 10D does. I couldn't be happier with my choices, with the exception I wish I had sprung for the IS with the 70-200, to make it more versatile walking around. The IS really makes a difference with the 300mm.

Wynn

Scotty B · Apr 16, 2003

My 3:
16~35mm 2.8L
50mm 1.4
100~400mm IS L

While others have placed the 50mm in their second section of the list, I would make it a priority purchase.

It's always good to have one fast prime in any bag, and they don't get better than that one.
--
scott b.
http://www.billwagnerphoto.com
D100,D1h,D30,10D,CP995

Girish Jadav · Apr 16, 2003

16-35 2.8L
28-70 2.8L
70-200 2.8L IS

Thanks,

GJ

Jon ... · Apr 16, 2003

Just came to the light side, from the dark side.

In order,

1Ds Body

70-200 IS 2.8
100 2.8 Macro
50 1.4

My reasoning. The zoom is a great lens, handheld, lowlight, stoodeeo or outdoors.

I needed something for closeups of baby toes etc

And, the camera is not a complete system without the ubiqutous 50mm. I have always had a 1.4 in any of my bags, this one is no different.

My 4th lens, something in the 30-70 range for the other end.

Jon ...

Ray Chen · Apr 16, 2003

and I quote,

"If you had to start from scratch what would you buy to cover as much as possible with 3-5 lenses."

The keywords here are "you" and "scratch".

--
Ray Chen

Chris Dodkin · Apr 16, 2003

Rich,

I went for the following series, to give me quality across the range and great flexibility.

17-35 F2.8L, 28-70 F2.8L, 70-200 F2.8L and 300 F2.8L

Also went for MKII versions of the 1.4x and 2x

Just THE best lenses, hats off to Canon, quality all the way.

Chris.

--
http://www.1D-images.com
[email protected]
Mac G4/iMac/iBook/iPod

alFR · Apr 16, 2003

Thomas Gardner · Apr 16, 2003

I won't try to answer in depth as that's too much for a forum answer. There are plenty of reviews on all lenses out there, use the search fuction if you're wanting in depth answers.

I put "Canon 24-70mm" into the search engine and this is one of the links that came up.

http://www.photographyreview.com/PRD_142386_3128crx.aspx

The short answer will depend on your shooting needs as opposed to someone that's answering based upon their needs.

You need to state what your shooting preference is as opposed to an all encompusing "What lens do you use?" question.

A clue. All lenses are a compromise and any compromise in money is a compromise in quality. There are exceptions but the exceptions are rare as opposed to universal.

Three to five lenses but you don't want to spend a bundle. Only gonna happen if you don't mind forgoing the higher end glass.

Commentary stops.

Simple, uncommentary answer;

1. 15-35mm f/3.5-4.5 Sigma
2. 24-70mm f/2.8L Canon
3. 100mm f/2.8 macro Sigma
4. 70-200mm f/2.8 Sigma
5. 300mm f/4.0L IS Canon

Commentary begins again.

There's a huge amount of change that can be made to this pile of glass but the list above is the break/pivot point. Anything less and you're going to hurt your image quality or create conflict with use of the glass and anything more and it's going to push the final bill through the roof.

Again there's no perfect glass except a lens for the time and moment and if you don't have an unlimited amount of cash, the choices become compromised.

Hope this un PC like answer is found helpful.

Thomas Gardner · Apr 16, 2003

Didn't he say three to five lenses and doesn't the TC count as an accessory?

Adam-T · Apr 16, 2003

Sigma 15-30EX
Used Canon 28-80 F2.8-4 (1989 vintage) or if you can afford it a used 28-70L
Used Canon 80-200L F2.8 "Magic Drainpipe"

the latter two are cheap but as good or better than their modern equivalents, the Sigma is THE bargain wide angle it would seem, but the canon 17-40L F4 maybe worth a look too for an extra £200

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

George Amer · Apr 16, 2003

Hi to all...
I'm getting the 10D and, coming from Nikon, am starting from ground zero.

Why was there no mention of the new 17-40 IS L? Is there a problem with this lense?
George

Rich A · Apr 16, 2003

George,

The 17-40 is not IS (at least that I've read) and except for a few is not out yet. Once released and reviewed by many it might become a choice. As of now the verdict is still out. 800.00 might make it an option.

Rich

--
Rich

if you could buy any 3 lenses what would you buy?

Forum Enthusiast

Member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Well-known member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Chris Dodkin

Guest

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Keyboard shortcuts