Reading mode: Light Dark

Lens setup for 40D, - zoom or primes ?

Go to last post
P

Peter265

New member
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Location
DK
I have just upgraded from my 350D/Rebel XT to the new 40D, I loved my 350D, but the 40D is just a super camera, and I really enjoy taking pictures with the 40D.

But I feel my “old” lens set-up needs an upgrade too. I take all kind of pictures; my kids, soccer, people, around the house, cars and normal tourists pictures. I am very fund of primes and like taking pictures in natural light.

My current lens set-up:

Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 (great little lens)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II (cheap, but takes very-very nice pictures)
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM IS (feels ok, but not that good)
Canon EF 75-300/4,0-5,6 ( don't use it )

I have looked at a two options:

Getting the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L, or getting two primes to cover my spectrum, e.g. Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM and Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

The reason I started with primes was the low light and the sharp images that a “cheaper” prime can deliver, instead of the more expensive, and very often not so sharp zoom lens.

I have never owned a Canon L lens, but when reading reviews I understand that even L lenses can’t outperform the cheaper prime lenses, or ?

What kind of set-up would you go for ?

Rg.
Peter
 
Sell your zooms, yoou deserve better lenses. The new 18-55 kit is nice, light, great performer and may be the only zoom you ever need. With the IS you can use it, even when the light is not perfect.

Than, just think about what you lens you might need. The 85 1.8 and the 100 2.0 are two very good lenses, most people agree the are as good as "L". 85 or 100mm would be very useful for your pictures.

Why don't you use your Canon EF 75-300/4,0-5,6 ?

Best regards

Richard
Peter265 said:
I have just upgraded from my 350D/Rebel XT to the new 40D, I loved my
350D, but the 40D is just a super camera, and I really enjoy taking
pictures with the 40D.

But I feel my “old” lens set-up needs an upgrade too. I take all kind
of pictures; my kids, soccer, people, around the house, cars and
normal tourists pictures. I am very fund of primes and like taking
pictures in natural light.

My current lens set-up:

Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 (great little lens)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II (cheap, but takes very-very nice pictures)
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM IS (feels ok, but not that good)
Canon EF 75-300/4,0-5,6 ( don't use it )

I have looked at a two options:

Getting the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L, or getting two primes to
cover my spectrum, e.g. Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM and Canon EF 85mm
f/1.8 USM

The reason I started with primes was the low light and the sharp
images that a “cheaper” prime can deliver, instead of the more
expensive, and very often not so sharp zoom lens.

I have never owned a Canon L lens, but when reading reviews I
understand that even L lenses can’t outperform the cheaper prime
lenses, or ?

What kind of set-up would you go for ?

Rg.
Peter
Click to expand...
 
Why don't you use your Canon EF 75-300/4,0-5,6 ?

Well, it seems to be to “long” on a 1,6 corp. I did get it for sports – but a bit slow for soccer games….

Rg.
Peter
 
Peter265 said:
Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 (great little lens)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II (cheap, but takes very-very nice pictures)
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM IS (feels ok, but not that good)
Canon EF 75-300/4,0-5,6 ( don't use it )
Click to expand...
Peter265 said:
Getting the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L, or getting two primes to
cover my spectrum, e.g. Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM and Canon EF 85mm
f/1.8 USM
Click to expand...
From the types of pictures that you listed, I am not sure the 17-40 would be long enough for you. If you want to try an L lens, replace that 75-300 with a 70-200 f/4L. That's the least expensive L lens available and it is a joy to use.

For the primes, I am also considering replacing my 50/1.8 with the 50/1.4. It isn't any sharper, but it does have better color and bokeh. If it was ring USM instead of micro USM, I would have ordered one already. There is a good post comparing the two lenses at http://photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

I would probably choose the 2 primes over the zoom. You can't go wrong with the 85/1.8. If you upgraded your 50mm to the 1.4 version and upgraded your 24mm to the Canon 28mm f/1.8 or Sigma 30mm f/1.4, you would have a nice set up.

--
Mark-B
http://www.msbphoto.com/
 
Hi Mark,

Thanks, for your reply – What you are saying is that the 17-40 alone will not be long enough, but if I put in an EF-S 60mm for portraits and micro – will that wrap my set-up, or would you still prefer the 28 F1.8/50 F1.4/85 F1.8 set-up ? (I think the price will around the same)

I did go to your web site, and Wow! Very nice shots, I love your sunsets, but what type of lens did you use ?
 
Peter265 said:
Thanks, for your reply – What you are saying is that the 17-40 alone
will not be long enough, but if I put in an EF-S 60mm for portraits
and micro – will that wrap my set-up, or would you still prefer the
28 F1.8/50 F1.4/85 F1.8 set-up ?
Click to expand...
The 17-40 is good for landscapes and it can also be used for indoor group shots, but it wouldn't be my choice for a portrait lens. It certainly isn't a soccer lens.

I'm not sure about the 60mm. You will already be using some version of the 50mm for portraits. What type of macro work do you do? If it is something that can run or fly away, I would prefer the 100mm f/2.8 to get a little more distance.

Are you planning to replace your existing lenses or just add to them? That would make a difference to me. Also, even though I am considering the 17-40 for my own use, I prefer the 24-105 / 28-105 / 28-135 lenses due to the extra reach on the long end. This may not be appropriate for you.
Peter265 said:
I did go to your web site, and Wow! Very nice shots, I love your
sunsets, but what type of lens did you use ?
Click to expand...
Most of those were taken with the dirt cheap lenses that I am trying to upgrade now. The majority were with the Canon 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 USM and the others were with the Canon 35mm f/2 or the 18-55 kit lens.

--
Mark-B
http://www.msbphoto.com/
 
Like you I prefer prime lenses for low light capability, smaller size & weight compared to zooms, & edge performance.

40D is great with my 24 1.4L, 35 1.4L, 135 2L, 300 F4L, 400 5.6L

Lens selection is a personal choice. A mix of primes & zooms might work as well. The 70-200 F4L IS is a great zoom. Choose the combo that meets your needs.

--

Canon EOS 5D, 40D & prime lenses, Albuquerque NM contact me if you are local and want to take some pics
 
Hi,

I did it, I went to the photo store and they let me try the 17-40/F4 L and the 50/F1.4 and 85/F1.8, it took me 5 minutes with each of my two lens options to decide.

The 50/F1.4 and 85/F1.8 are so great shooting in lower light, so I took them booth home for MY OWN Christmas present.

Thanks for all you help –

Rg.
Peter
(Mr. Prime)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top