Which lens should be my next purchase?

[sigler]

Hi,

Like MANY others, I have the 10D with the 28-135 USM lens.

What should I purchase next? I'm thinking the 50 1.4?

Any suggestions?

Thanks,

Rob

[Aylwin]

Yep, I too started with the 28-135 IS.

My 2nd purchase was the 50 1.8 II. I figured I would "play" with this cheaper one for awhile (the 50 1.4 is almost 5 times more expensive here) and then upgrade to the 50 1.4 later if I feel I need to. By the way, I read somewhere that the 50 1.8 I was actually better but I couldn't find it.

Next, I got the 75-300 IS. I think either this or the 50 (1.4 or 1.8) would be a good 2nd purchase. Just depends on what you want to do with it.

My next target is the 17-40L, my first L lens. It's probably going to be AWHILE though before I purchase it. Too much spending lately!

Good luck!

Aylwin

[lightandlife]

Save money and get an L, any L.

The first lens I got was 50mm Macro and it was a mistake. Then I got 85mm L. I am very happy with it. It is the most precious one.

[Belmondo]

I'd recommend the 17-40L. Every shooting style is different, and everyone's needs are not the same, but I find the extra wide-angle much more useful than anything longer than 135. I have the 75-300 IS, and hardly ever take it out of the bag.

Another possibility, depending again on your needs is the 100mm macro lens. Some days, you just feel like getting close to things, and that won't break the bank either.

I recommend you not get in a hurry about acquiring lenses. The longer you go, the more obvious the choices will be based on your own unique needs.

[defordphoto]

It depends on your shooting needs. I wouldn't waste my money on the 50 1.4. The 50 1.8 is super cheap, super sharp and only slightly slower than the 1.4. I just don't think that it's worth the $$$.

I also started with the 28-125 IS and will probably always have one. It's really a sweet lens. My forte is wildlife, sports, auto racing, boat racing so the 17-40L that belmondo & Aylwin recommends would do me little good.

I have opted for the 100-400L IS and the 70-200L 2.8 IS and am loving it. I rarely use the 50 1.8 so the 17-40L would not get much use either in my bag, but I do plan on getting one eventually to complete my collection. Sometimes you don't know what you really need until you have it in hand. :)

Good luck!

[ilya]

Aylwin wrote:
Yep, I too started with the 28-135 IS.

My 2nd purchase was the 50 1.8 II. I figured I would "play" with this cheaper one for awhile (the 50 1.4 is almost 5 times more expensive here) and then upgrade to the 50 1.4 later if I feel I need to. By the way, I read somewhere that the 50 1.8 I was actually better but I couldn't find it.

Next, I got the 75-300 IS. I think either this or the 50 (1.4 or 1.8) would be a good 2nd purchase. Just depends on what you want to do with it.

My next target is the 17-40L, my first L lens. It's probably going to be AWHILE though before I purchase it. Too much spending lately!

Good luck!

Aylwin

Exactly the same lens path for me. Also waiting to get the 17-40L. Though I got a deal with my wife, so long as I make enough in stocks, and actually cash in the 'winnings', I can funnel that money into glass! (wish me luck).

[Vegas Poboy]

I agree with RFMSports it all depends on your shooting needs. Think about what you really plan on doing and then go from there. The 50mm 1.8 is not a bad purchase anyway you go do to it is very inexpensive. I almost tossed that lens out until I got the 10D. Now its great for low light action & portraits. With the multiplier its a 1.8 @ 80mm and its sharp.
Again see what you really plan on doing & choose wisely.
:)

[msvirick]

After my first lens like yours, my second was
Tameron 19-35.
Not in Canon class, but a good wide lens for under $200.
Dont use this lens for closeups, like potraits, pictures are soft. But wide pictures are good.

[DaveG]

sigler wrote:
Hi,

Like MANY others, I have the 10D with the 28-135 USM lens.

What should I purchase next? I'm thinking the 50 1.4?

Any suggestions?

Thanks,

Rob


I would go with the 50 f1.4. As a matter of fact I DID go with the 50 f1.4 as my second lens to the 24-85 f3.5/4.5. I wanted speed and quality with that lens and a full stop and a metal lens mount easily made me choose the 1.4 over the f1.8. Besides the 1.4 isn't all that expensive.

For wide the 16-35 or the 17-40 L lenses are the way to go. I have the 16-35 but I also make my living with this stuff. I also have the non IS 70-200 f2.8 L. The f4 or even the variable aperture lens in this focal length will do a great job, and it all depends on your finances.

If Walmart still has them in stock they were just about giving away the 75-300 IS lens. Although not up to the quality of the L lenses this is still more than OK. Geez if Walmart in Canada has a price like that I'll buy one!

[Jorge]

It totally depends on what you want.

If you want more range combined with excelent quality, low weigth and relatively low cost try the 70-200mm/f4L I don't think I ever read anything but praise about it - I'm also very satisfied with it myself!

[dbarthel]

An alternative for wide is the Sigma 15-35 zoom. The big caviat is that it really only works well on the reduced sensor size of the 10D because of distortion and vignetting at the edges. So if you have any thoughts about full frame, including film, this would not be a good choice. For the 10D a bargin.

Dan

[mapdealer]

belmondo wrote:


I recommend you not get in a hurry about acquiring lenses. The longer you go, the more obvious the choices will be based on your own unique needs.


Belmondo is EXACTLY right. I jumped in with both feet and now have a couple of lenses I don't really need. I have 3 Sigma zooms (24-70, 70-200, 50-500) and am very happy with them. However, I have heard great things about the Canon glass (especially L) and look forward to trying it someday - when I win a lottery!

[ctgoldwing]

I have found that my lens requirements reflect my shooting interests. After I disposed of all my film equipment about 6 months ago I purchased the 10D & 24-70 f2.8 l and 70-200 f2.8 l lenses. The 24-70 is still my favorite but when I started to shoot sports I obtained a fast 200 & 300mm & 1.4 extender. A lot of indoor shooting (1st grandchild born) required the 16-35mm & 50 f1.4. Macro work requires a macro.
I think before you can answer your own question you have to define what the 'problem' is.
Bottom line - you can't have enough lenses! lol

[SemieE]

The first lens I bought for my 10D was the 50mm 1.4 and I am completely satisfied with it. My biggest pet peeve with previous digital camera's I owned was that they were never really good for low light shooting and I think this really tipped me over the edge on choosing the 1.4. Combine that with the metal mount, USM, and the good word of mouth it seems to get on the internet and that pretty much sums up why you might want to pick that over the 50mm 1.8