New D-10 needs help with lens choice.

[DrMikeT]

I just picked up a D-10 body at my local Ritz Camera for $1499. They got it in on Friday morning and I bought it that night. Just in the right place at the right time. I have been using a Nikon 885 P&S and have been waiting to get back into SLR's after almost 15 years , sine I sold my Nikon F2 and lenses. I am an amature photographer and a dentist. I will be taking intraoral photos and have pretty much figured the EF 100 Macro is my only real chioce. But now the hard part, I need some lenses for my non dental needs. I take a pretty large variety from landscape, to group and portrait. Also I have a strong desire for nature photography, mostly birds. I figure my limited sports needs, the kids soccer games, would be covered under any of the above. Now my big question, keeping in mind I am an amature and probally will seldom print larger than 11-14 what lenses sould I get? I have come up with two groups.
Group 1
Canon EF 28-135 IS
EF 20-35
EF 75-300 IS

Group 2
Canon EF 17-40 L
EF 70-200 f4 L
1.4 mulitplier for above.

Any input help or sugestions is greatly apreciated. The cost differance between the groups is only about $300.

[CyberDyneSystems]

If it were me,. I would start with the 28-135 as an all around bring it to cookout for pictures lens. But do you need "IS" in a 135mm lens??? I have had decent luck hand holding up to 200mm on a general porpuse zoom (28mm-200mm Sigma) In fact I even get away with hand holding the 500mm when the sun is out. I don't know what the advantage of IS is on a kens that short.

Then if you can spend the money and want a medium length telephoto get the 70-200L It is one of the best zoom lenses ever made. And of course as you point out,.. if you need more distance you can add the 1.4 or even 2X teleconverter.

Then see if you have an immediate need for one of those wider lenses,. I found 28mm to be O-kay so far. But I agree that a wider lens is in my future.

Also,.. you may find rather than a wide lens that you are itching for a macro instead,...

But if you are holding a 10D in your hands and have no lens to shoot with,. run and get that 28-135mm so you can start!

[Roger_Cavanagh]

You do notice the difference in image quality with L lenses, especially zooms. A lot of people say they get good results with the 28-135 IS, but just as many say it's a dog on their DLSR.

You might get more quality bang for your buck looking at primes. I'd think about:

EF 20/2.8
EF 50/1.4 or EF 50/1.8
EF 85/1.8
EF 135/2 L

Don't know what to suggest to look at at the 200-300 range. There are choices, but I'm not sure what might be the best.

For shooting birds, even 280 (200 x 1.4) isn't really going to be long enough. I've used 400 and the reach isn't that long - unless it's ostriches we're talking about. :) Another issue with the 70-200/4 is speed, and with the 1.4x, max f-stop would drop to 5.6.

Regards,

[martcol]

Hi Good luck with your 10D

There's lots of discussion on this forum that will help you and here are some links to previous threads. Mostly, it comes down to what you want to do and how much you want to pay!

Canon L lenses all seem worth having in terms of compatability and user satisfaction (I've never owned one!) Non Canon lenses don't seem to get much of a look in although, there are exceptions. And, even some Canon lenses aren't up to much.

For me, I'm making do with cheaper lenses and am saving for an L lens. My first one will be the 24-70.

Enjoy the threads - There are more, but I got fed up Cuttin' & Pastin'. Have a look via the search option above. It's straight fwd.

Martin

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10687
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10673
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10668
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10649
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10550
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10355
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10340

[Marley]

I'd recommend these two lenses.

EF 50mm 1.8
EF 85mm /1.8

The 50mm 1.4 is really great, but you can save a few hundred dollars by purchasing the 50mm1.8.

I haven't even used my 50mm 1.4 since I bought my
85mm 1.8.

Fantastic lens for portraits and with the 1.6 multiplication, it will have plenty of reach for you kids soccer games.

[supergonzo]

The IS lenses are worth every penny. Especially for nature photography.

I would say you will love the 100-400mm IS Canon lens.
Although much more expensive then the knock-offs, Canon lenses (with or without IS) are simply the best you can buy.

[DrMikeT]

Thanks for the replies so far. I like the versitility of zooms vs. primes. That way I don't have to carry so much glass and I can frame my photos better. However for $70 the EF50 1.8 looks like a steal. One other option that I have thought of is the 28-135 IS for the my normal walk around lens and getting the L 100-400 IS for the long stuff. My concern is the size/weight of this lens and the $1400 cost. But there wouldn't be much overlap with this system and due to the 1.6x factor there would be alot of reach. May need some thing wide though. Any thoughts on this?

[defordphoto]

I think you're moving in the right direction. I (also) have the 28-135 IS and the 50 1.8. I also have a (slow) Sigma 75-300, which will go away when I get something like the 100-400 or something along those lines. Eventually I am going to have to get something wider as the 28mm just doesn't cut it when you're trying to do a wide shot.

The 28-135IS (with macro) has just been one sweet little lens. Love it! The 50 is nice when I need some speed.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I am having a lot of success with these two Sigma lenses.

EX 50-500mm
EX 70-200mm f/2.8

I'm sure that the Canon "L" lenses have advantages,. but I am really impressed with both of these for wildlife. The 500mm on the 10D gives me a effective 800mm! And yet I have been able to use it hand held in daylight with no problems at all. (needles to say I use a monopod 99% of the time,. it weighs a lot)