Reading mode: Light Dark

If you could only have one lens...

Go to last post
That is the lens normally on the camera, and I shoot about 70% of my pictures with it. When I was shooting film I worked most of the time with a 35, which is more or less what the 20 translates to. After the 20 I use the 15, 50 1.4, and 200 2.8 a lot.

Here's a 20mm shot of one of the four graduates of Kivalina Alaska's high school getting congratulations from the principal.



James Mason
Kotzebue, Alaska
http://www.pbase.com/zidar

--
'He's out there operating without any decent restraint, totally beyond
the pale of any acceptable human conduct.'
  • Apocalypse Now
 
doug572 said:
I have to agree. I just bought a 28-135 IS and I'm not 100% happy
with it. The IS is great, but it's a slow lens and gets even
slower as you employ the zoom. It's by no means a bad lens, but
had I to do over again, I would have spent the extra cash and went
with a faster lens

I was always taught that you should never use a zoom that was more
than a 3x, short to long. I should have listened to that old
photography teacher.

Gary, GREAT shots of the baptist church and the panda.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Doug. My two L zooms are all I need to carry now. Notice that all of the zoo shots were done with the Canon 2x Extender.

--
Gary Coombs
My Profile contains my Equipment List
http://GaryCoombs.com
http://GaryCoombs.com/10D/New
http://GaryCoombs.com/10D/Test

A good photograph is knowing where to stand. -Ansel Adams
 
So how do you like the 24L? On a tripod at night, would you use it at f/2 for landscapes?
David Kieltyka said:
On the 10D I love the way 24mm lenses work. A little wider than
"normal" but not enough to be obviously wide. This one focal length
could easily cover 90%+ of my needs. I'd choose either the Canon
24mm f/1.4, which I own, or the Sigma f/1.8. The Sigma's
close-focusing capability (18cm) is lots of fun. The Canon is a
little crisper at f/2 than my friend's Sigma but at smaller
apertures it's dead even.

-Dave-
Click to expand...
 
I have a 17-35 2.8L coming soon, I hope. All I need after that is a long lens and I am good to go for a while.

-Doug
Gary Coombs said:
doug572 said:
I have to agree. I just bought a 28-135 IS and I'm not 100% happy
with it. The IS is great, but it's a slow lens and gets even
slower as you employ the zoom. It's by no means a bad lens, but
had I to do over again, I would have spent the extra cash and went
with a faster lens

I was always taught that you should never use a zoom that was more
than a 3x, short to long. I should have listened to that old
photography teacher.

Gary, GREAT shots of the baptist church and the panda.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Doug. My two L zooms are all I need to carry now. Notice
that all of the zoo shots were done with the Canon 2x Extender.

--
Gary Coombs
My Profile contains my Equipment List
http://GaryCoombs.com
http://GaryCoombs.com/10D/New
http://GaryCoombs.com/10D/Test

A good photograph is knowing where to stand. -Ansel Adams
Click to expand...
 
doug572 said:
I have a 17-35 2.8L coming soon, I hope. All I need after that is
a long lens and I am good to go for a while.
Click to expand...
After a lifetime of collecting Canon zooms and primes I decided to sell the whole lot (all manual focus) when I went digital. I hate changing lenses all the time so I decided a year ago that I would be well served with just two L zooms:

24-70 2.8L
70-200 2.8L IS

I have not been disappointed and would do it the exact same way again. All the pix in my galleries were made with only these two lenses.

--
Gary Coombs
My Profile contains my Equipment List
http://GaryCoombs.com
http://GaryCoombs.com/10D/New
http://GaryCoombs.com/10D/Test

A good photograph is knowing where to stand. -Ansel Adams
 
BertD said:
For the 10D, which one lens would you pick for general, all around
use?
Click to expand...
Sheesh if you could only have one lens then it would have to be the not so desirable 28-300 f/3.5-5.6L IS.

I can't live without WA or telephoto, so I'd slash my wrists I think.
 
I have read seller descriptions of used lens that have puzzling stuff. They mention expected dust inside lens. Does this affect image quality?

How much is it to have L glass serviced to make it like new ?

Anyone ever buy used? What are the odds your getting a good lens?

Thanks,

Paul
 
As you focus and zoom most lenses will pull air and dust into them. Over time they will all have internal dust. Normally it doesn't affect the images. You should be OK.

Rich
Paul McHale said:
I have read seller descriptions of used lens that have puzzling
stuff. They mention expected dust inside lens. Does this affect
image quality?

How much is it to have L glass serviced to make it like new ?

Anyone ever buy used? What are the odds your getting a good lens?

Thanks,

Paul
Click to expand...
 
I would agree with most comments that the 24-70L is great. I would love to own one, but I can't afford to spend $1,200 for a lens.

You are going to get all sort of suggestions if price is not a limit. If price is a limiting factor then provide some guidelines and you will get a more focused response.

Ed
BertD said:
For the 10D, which one lens would you pick for general, all around
use?
Click to expand...
--
Ed
http://www.cbrycelea.com/photos/
 
I kinda agree. I was reading everyones posts here and I think that they all are justified in why they think that their choice would be the best, but it all comes down to HOW you like to shoot.

This is the way that I think about it. I like to take pictures of people/animals/etc that is a bit more candid. For that you cannot be 2-3 feet away unless you surpise the person. You also may not want the person to be just a small portion of the frame. Because of this I like a longer zoom lens for most of the pictures. That way I don't feel like I am interfereing with the picture, I am just observing.

If you like portiats and family photos (groups, couples, etc) or like scenic pictures that entail a lot of landscape or a Wider feel, then a smaller lens would be perfect.

When I got my camera last month I got a 20-35, and a 28-200. I find that I use the 28-200 more, even though the 20-35 is a better lens (in my opinion). I think that I will check on getting a 17-40 or something for closer pictures only becase I like a bit more range. The 20-35 is a great lens, but minimal range, almost not worth it.

Jerry
FretNoMore said:
BertD said:
For the 10D, which one lens would you pick for general, all around
use?
Click to expand...
This question comes up every now and then, and I don't think it has
a valid answer for me. With one lens only I'd more or less quit
photography, it would be too limiting. If I really had to I might
keep the 100-400 and concentrate on nature photography as I enjoy
this the most, but luckily it is only a hypothetical.

Most likely though I'd get a P&S that fits in my shirt pocket and
sell the 10D, why lug around such a big camera when it is limited
to one lens? It's more a choice between as small as possible or as
competent as possible for me.

Actually I'm not sure I get the concept of "general, all-round
photography". Maybe it means holiday snaps, pictures of your kids
and pets etc... I don't do much of that. Most subjects I want to
shoot have specific needs for lens choice, there's no one lens to
cover everything well.

If you're asking because you want help picking a lens for yourself,
only you know what type of photography you want to do. People often
seem to answer 17-40, 24-70, 50, 35, 28-135... something in the
"normal" range.
Click to expand...
 
use it for 50% of my work
 
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