New lenses for 50D

Cionn

All,

I would appreciate some advice on what lens I should get for my new camera which will be a Canon 50d (I've been though the should I just get the 40D but have convinced myself that 50D is the one I will get).

I had a 400D with 18-55 kit lens and a 28-135(loved this lens from argos purchased at the right price) which was stolen from my house last week(with most of my other camera stuff) so I am in the situation that I am going to have to start again.

I loved the 28-135 lens but always felt I needed to have a lens that went wider. I am thinking of getting this kit as the EF-S 17-55mm IS U lens seems to get great press. I would love eventually to get the canon 10-22mm lens eventually but it's beyond reach for the moment. I don't need anything too long for now so any lenses up to 135/150 would be fine. I have read some review of the kit lens 18-200 that you can get with the 50d and it would appear to be a lens that tries to do too much.
The way I feel about it is that if I am going to get a camera as good as the 50d I should be a lens decent enough to back it up.

I apologise if this seems like keyboard vomit I'm not happy that all my equipment is gone and I am eager to replace it with the right items. Its not very often you get to start over with a blank page and rebuild your collection of camera's and lenses.

bovril

The lens you mentioned the 17-55 f2.8 is a very nice lens. I have it and use it as my walkaround lens. 17 is quite wide and does for landscapes. 55 end is nice for portraits. It's a great lens for gigs too as it is f2.8.

I also have the sigma 10-20 and for a lot of things I find this is too wide. I don't like changing lenses all the time either so I tend to leave the 17-55 on most of the time if I'm not using my 400mm.

There is also the 17-85 f4 but it's not as sharp and as good with colours as the 17-55 f2.8.

One thing to make you aware of it you are not already is that the 17-55 and the 17-85 I mention can only be used on crop body cameras. If you ever intended to upgrade to full frame they wouldn't work on the full frame camera. For me I don't intend to upgrade to full frame for a while yet so it suits me to have the 17-55 f2.8.

ttcomet

I have the 17-55 on a 40d and it is a great lens, I would definitely recommend it.
But just to confuse the issue a bit would you not think of looking at the new 500D, it seems to me at first glance to be better then both the 40D and 50D.

Cionn

ttcomet wrote: »

I have the 17-55 on a 40d and it is a great lens, I would definitely recommend it.
But just to confuse the issue a bit would you not think of looking at the new 500D, it seems to me at first glance to be better then both the 40D and 50D.

Thanks I have just seen the press release on the 500D and that has got me thinking alright. I will wait to see what the reviews are like. It seems quite similar to the 50d even has the same screen (which was one of the features I liked about the 50d).
It may impact on the price of the 50d too which would be nice, if it went down that is.


thanks for the reply I think I am sold on the 17-55 lens now.

Cionn

davgtrek

Cionn.
aside from the body. If the 17-55 is in your budget get it. It seems to be the defacto lens for crops. I have a 40d , canon 10-22 & a sigma 18-50 2.8 and I'm happy enough. The 10-22 is a lovely lens and takes in everything.

From at times exhaustive reading of reviews and trawling net for opinions it seems to me now that we all get too hung up on the gear and get caught up in this techie spend frenzy.

I would definitely get the cheapest ( but good ) body out of the 40d,50d,500d etc ilk and with the money saved put it towards the best lens.

in 3 years your 500d will be a dinosaur anyway and you'll be itchy to change. The lens doesn't change a huge amount anyway.

Perhaps opt away from the canon 18-55IS and go for a non IS sigma or Tamron which you could buy + the canon 10-22 for the same cost as the 18-55IS.

The ISO levels are so smooth on the canon that I think you could get away with IS in most cases.

Good luck with your purchase, i dont suppose Argos will make the same mistake twice on their pricing.

jackdaw

Cionn not to confuse you but....

... the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 DII is a fantastic lens ...

and probably a lot cheaper then the canon version.


Im not sure of the IQ on the canon version ... bu tthe Tamron is amazing

some say it approaches L standard.

Cionn

Thanks for the responses all I will check out those lenses. I had been staying away from Sigma lenses as I have a 70-300 zoom lens (only cost 200 so pretty low end) but was never really happy with it. I also read that build quality on the 10-20mm lens can be hit and miss. Perhaps I need to re evaluate my thinking and look at those brands.

I suspect I will need another few hours on the net tonight to try and close in on an order.

Thanks all for the replys