lenses for a 20D

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele (75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

My preference would be to add a high quality zoom like the EF70-200 f4 rather than lenses you will want to trade out later. A few choice primes could be added also, it depends what you are trying to cover.

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

This will play a large part in your decision. Will you fall in love with your 20D and try to extract the maximum technically pleasing photos you can out of it and, or will you just shoot a lot of pictures and enjoy them at the print level for what they are and rarely revisit this forum once you've purchased your lenses? If the former, don't get those lenses. If the latter, they may be okay. You'll probably somewhere in-between though.

I can't recommend the 750-300IS for such a good camera. It's a 1st-gen IS without an internal focusing USM (Micro USM instead) - this makes it too slow for sports and the optics are very middling anyway. 28-135 is faster but again middling optics. Along with your 18-55, you'd then have middling, middling, and middling. Is that okay for you?

You might consider the 17-85 instead, which some people will admittedly say has middling optics but otherwise a great combo of focal lengths, IS, and USM. Combined with the other poster's 70-200/4 suggestion, you'd have a very nice combo of good performers that are well matched to your camera. Add a 50/1.8 which makes a fine/cheap portrait lens at the 1.6 crop.

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

Thanks randy,

I appreciate your comments, but as much as I would like to have all top quality lenses I am looking for a set that I can use immediately for all occasions rather than having a gap in focal range. However, taking your comments into account:

1 Is the lack of IS on the 70-200 much of a problem ie reduces hand use.

2 The 70-200 lens would leave only £200 in my budget for a mid lens as I would not want a gap between 55 and 70 and therefore would require a sub of the 28-135 by such as the 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 USM II

Would that combination be better.

Lastly I agree primes would be very nice but I am starting from scratch and the zooms will give greater options to start with.

randy jk said:

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

70-200 f/4L at high ISO on the 20D will still beat the pants off of the 75-300. The latter is pretty useless past 200mm anyway. I consider the 70-200 the best zoom lens in my bag, remarkable for the price.

For a mid-range zoom, look at either the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 or the new Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, either of which can probably be had for the left-over money in your budget after the 70-200. They're faster than the 28-135, and sharper.

I have both the 28-135 and the Tamron 28-75. I got the Tamron because I wanted a faster lens, and most of my 28-135 shots were being taken at the wide-end of the lens (due to my shooting style and the 1.6x crop factor of my 10D). Since getting the Tamron, the Canon has been collecting dust.

robertkinchin said:

I appreciate your comments, but as much as I would like to have all
top quality lenses I am looking for a set that I can use
immediately for all occasions rather than having a gap in focal
range. However, taking your comments into account:

1 Is the lack of IS on the 70-200 much of a problem ie reduces hand
use.

2 The 70-200 lens would leave only £200 in my budget for a mid lens
as I would not want a gap between 55 and 70 and therefore would
require a sub of the 28-135 by such as the 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 USM II

Would that combination be better.

Lastly I agree primes would be very nice but I am starting from
scratch and the zooms will give greater options to start with.

randy jk said:

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

but is on a limited budget.

thanks M Irwin,

It looks like the 75-300 is out. I try to get the best out of what I can afford. The 17-85 is a better range than the 18-55 that comes with the camera. Maybe I can sell the 18-55 to help pay for the 17-85.

I dont know much about canon lenses (good vs bad) other than you get what you pay for and as above I am limited in funds I would like the best combo within the budget.

thanks for your input
Robert

M Irwin said:

I can't recommend the 750-300IS for such a good camera. It's a
1st-gen IS without an internal focusing USM (Micro USM instead) -
this makes it too slow for sports and the optics are very middling
anyway. 28-135 is faster but again middling optics. Along with your
18-55, you'd then have middling, middling, and middling. Is that
okay for you?

You might consider the 17-85 instead, which some people will
admittedly say has middling optics but otherwise a great combo of
focal lengths, IS, and USM. Combined with the other poster's
70-200/4 suggestion, you'd have a very nice combo of good
performers that are well matched to your camera. Add a 50/1.8 which
makes a fine/cheap portrait lens at the 1.6 crop.

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

the 70-200 f/4L and either the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 or the 17-85 IS

thanks ray I shall look the tamron up

Robert

Ray Comas said:

For a mid-range zoom, look at either the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 or the
new Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, either of which can probably be had for the
left-over money in your budget after the 70-200. They're faster
than the 28-135, and sharper.

I have both the 28-135 and the Tamron 28-75. I got the Tamron
because I wanted a faster lens, and most of my 28-135 shots were
being taken at the wide-end of the lens (due to my shooting style
and the 1.6x crop factor of my 10D). Since getting the Tamron, the
Canon has been collecting dust.

robertkinchin said:

I appreciate your comments, but as much as I would like to have all
top quality lenses I am looking for a set that I can use
immediately for all occasions rather than having a gap in focal
range. However, taking your comments into account:

1 Is the lack of IS on the 70-200 much of a problem ie reduces hand
use.

2 The 70-200 lens would leave only £200 in my budget for a mid lens
as I would not want a gap between 55 and 70 and therefore would
require a sub of the 28-135 by such as the 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 USM II

Would that combination be better.

Lastly I agree primes would be very nice but I am starting from
scratch and the zooms will give greater options to start with.

randy jk said:

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I have the 28-135 USM IS and it's a good sharp lens with a good range. I've had it some time on a film EOS 33 and if I were buying now I think I would get the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX DG Macro (new lens just out, Park Cameras will sell you one for £309) because with the 28-135 you're down to f5 at 70mm and the 24-70 is f2.8 all the way. However with this you lose the 70-135 range which is useful andI find the IS useful on the 28-135 but leave it off until I know I need it. Some people say forget the kit lens and get the Sigma 18-125 but there are conflicting reviews and the kit lens is good stopped down. I don't do much telephoto but recently bought a Sigma 70-300 f4:5.6 APO Super Macro II. This will cost you around £160 and it's good quality for the price. No IS so you need a steady hand or tripod. So if you get the 28-135 and the tele Sigma you will have £175 change from your £700 which you can partly use up with the Canon 50 f.18 (£75 or so).

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

--
Nick Spurrrier

I have the 70-200f4L, 85mm f1.8 and 135mm f2.

The zoom is an awesome lens for outdoor day to day use and also works very well with the TC 1.4 if you need more length. Strong features are gorgeous bokeh and color. fast Af when you have the focus switch set correctly ;-)

I had mine calibrated by Canon under warranty and see a big difference

If you can afford $550 before rebates, go for it

As for me, I'm switching to all primes and will be selling my 70-200 sometime next year (this is not an ad). The 85 and 135 are different animals all together!

Good luck
Rob

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

--

In my experience a great digital image is 10% the equipment, 10% Photoshop and 80% me. I don't take many great digital images

The 20D as a kit with the 17-85 ($1999 MAP) is just starting to hit Camera Dealer shelves in the US, and can save you some money compared to getting the lens by itself - especially if you buy the 18-55 kit. The 18-55 has rather limited resale value (less than $100).

robertkinchin said:

thanks M Irwin,

It looks like the 75-300 is out. I try to get the best out of what
I can afford. The 17-85 is a better range than the 18-55 that comes
with the camera. Maybe I can sell the 18-55 to help pay for the
17-85.

I dont know much about canon lenses (good vs bad) other than you
get what you pay for and as above I am limited in funds I would
like the best combo within the budget.

thanks for your input
Robert

M Irwin said:

I can't recommend the 750-300IS for such a good camera. It's a
1st-gen IS without an internal focusing USM (Micro USM instead) -
this makes it too slow for sports and the optics are very middling
anyway. 28-135 is faster but again middling optics. Along with your
18-55, you'd then have middling, middling, and middling. Is that
okay for you?

You might consider the 17-85 instead, which some people will
admittedly say has middling optics but otherwise a great combo of
focal lengths, IS, and USM. Combined with the other poster's
70-200/4 suggestion, you'd have a very nice combo of good
performers that are well matched to your camera. Add a 50/1.8 which
makes a fine/cheap portrait lens at the 1.6 crop.

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--

• Woody -

Eqiupment: Lots. (partial list in profile)

Quote: 'The only thing some people will believe is their own eyes. But in the realm of the quality of a printed image, is there really anything else that can be believed? '

No sign of it in the UK found one mention of it coming but price was more than buying seperately, whereas the 18-55 is about £10 more on some sites and sometimes cheaper than without lens. So I considering it as free.

thanks anyway Robert

Woody W. said:

robertkinchin said:

thanks M Irwin,

It looks like the 75-300 is out. I try to get the best out of what
I can afford. The 17-85 is a better range than the 18-55 that comes
with the camera. Maybe I can sell the 18-55 to help pay for the
17-85.

I dont know much about canon lenses (good vs bad) other than you
get what you pay for and as above I am limited in funds I would
like the best combo within the budget.

thanks for your input
Robert

M Irwin said:

I can't recommend the 750-300IS for such a good camera. It's a
1st-gen IS without an internal focusing USM (Micro USM instead) -
this makes it too slow for sports and the optics are very middling
anyway. 28-135 is faster but again middling optics. Along with your
18-55, you'd then have middling, middling, and middling. Is that
okay for you?

You might consider the 17-85 instead, which some people will
admittedly say has middling optics but otherwise a great combo of
focal lengths, IS, and USM. Combined with the other poster's
70-200/4 suggestion, you'd have a very nice combo of good
performers that are well matched to your camera. Add a 50/1.8 which
makes a fine/cheap portrait lens at the 1.6 crop.

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--

• Woody -

Eqiupment: Lots. (partial list in profile)
Quote: 'The only thing some people will believe is their own eyes.
But in the realm of the quality of a printed image, is there really
anything else that can be believed? '

Click to expand...

I have now purchase the 20D with its 18-55 plus (thanks to all) the 70-200f/4L and the tamron 28-75f/2.8 total price £1880

Robert

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

I have 3 lenses with my 20 D and i love it :
an used 28-70 2.8 L USM
17-40 L
and 85mm 1.8
all are very sharp and well built

Hi,
I was in the same struggle a month ago, when I stepped up into DSLR photography.

I already knew I need a "versatile walkaround lens" as well as a decent Zoom and also wanted to be able to take some macro shots so here's my lineup and I'm extremely happy with it

• 18-55 Kit Lens (same as you - virtually for free)
• 28-135 IS USM (great lens for the $ especially the IS)
• 100-400L IS (outstanding Lens and the IS is just awesome - I didn't think I'd use this lens that often)
• Canon 500D Macro screw on Lens

So far I haven't found that I'd miss anything - maybe someday I'll upgrade my "walkaround" Lens to some L glass - but they are not that versatile - so until I saved some money and figure on which end I'd need it I'm totally happy with what I have!

Take a look at my gallery to check into what these Lenses are able to deliver (in the B&W Section there are still som V1 Pics)

Hope that helped?!
Andreas

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

--
--------
PicGer
http://koedel.smugmug.com

Look into the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 or the Tamron 17-35 f2.8-4, especially if you are more of an indoor/everyday photo sort of person. Long zooms are all well and good but I find I use focal lengths below 85 much more often than above 85. Then again, I don't care about squirrels, birds etc.

Try to consider what photo subjects are important to you and build your lens collection from there. Don't try and cover everything in your first purchase.

PicGer said:

• 18-55 Kit Lens (same as you - virtually for free)
• 28-135 IS USM (great lens for the $ especially the IS)
• 100-400L IS (outstanding Lens and the IS is just awesome - I

didn't think I'd use this lens that often)

• Canon 500D Macro screw on Lens

So far I haven't found that I'd miss anything - maybe someday I'll
upgrade my "walkaround" Lens to some L glass - but they are not
that versatile - so until I saved some money and figure on which
end I'd need it I'm totally happy with what I have!

Take a look at my gallery to check into what these Lenses are able
to deliver (in the B&W Section there are still som V1 Pics)

Hope that helped?!
Andreas

robertkinchin said:

hi,

This is my first post so sorry if this question has been flogged to
death. I am buying a 20D (with its 18-55 as its virtually free) but
my question is would the addition of the CAN 28-135 IS USM and the
CAN 75-300 IS USM be a good cost effective set of additional lenses
for the 20D.

This would seem to give me a wide angle combination (18-55) for
landscape etc, a general wide - tele (28-135) and long tele
(75-300) for sports wildlife etc.

Does anyone have a better combination for the same value ( £700 for
the additionals). BTW I do like the idea of the IS but can be
persuaded by a good argument.

Robert

Click to expand...

--
--------
PicGer
http://koedel.smugmug.com

Click to expand...

Got the kit this was taken with the tamron 28-70 f/2.8



Regards
Robert

robertkinchin said:

I have now purchase the 20D with its 18-55 plus (thanks to all) the
70-200f/4L and the tamron 28-75f/2.8 total price £1880

Robert

Click to expand...