Help me pick my next lens...

[xxbodkinxx]

350D
Something Sharp

I have the 50MM 1.8 on order allready and the the rest of my small collection are listed in my Sig. I bought the 75-300 before I knew how bad it really was. I was thinking about getting the 70-300 f4L next to replace it but I figured I would come to the pros here and ask for advice. I was also thining of a UWA like the sigma 10-20 but not sure how usefull it would really be.

[young_einstein]

It's utterly pointless to try and recommend a lens, without knowing what sort of photos you want to be taking ...

[xxbodkinxx]

I would say outside pictures of my kids playing, my cars, and wildlife are my 3 main areas that I would like to improve on.

[vjack]

There isn't such a thing as a 70-300 f4L, so I'll assume you mean the 70-200L f/4. If so, that is probably the most highly recommended lens on these forums. I think you can safely buy this without hesitation. Of course, this probably isn't going to be long enough to help you with wildlife (unless we are talking about large wildlife that will let you get close).

Are you happy with your kit lens? If not, consider replacing it with a good walkaround zoom. If you don't need f/2.8 speed, I'd look at the Sigma 17-70 or Canon 17-85 IS. If you want f/2.8 in this range, I'd consider the Tamron 17-50 or wait for the Tokina 16-50 to be released this Fall.

Another route would be to keep your kit lens for the low end of this range, and pick up a good f/2.8 zoom like the Tamron 28-75 or Sigma 24-70.

UWA are fairly specialized, and I'd probably not get one yet. You have other holes to fill that you'd probably get more use from.

[DRBair]

I would recommend the Tamron 28-75mm as a good walk around lens. I also have the 70-200mm f/2.8 and these lens have given me the range that allows me to take photos at graduations, weddings, dance recitals, etc..

[Tangledlines]

I would recommend the Tamron 28-75mm as a good walk around lens. I also have the 70-200mm f/2.8 and these lens have given me the range that allows me to take photos at graduations, weddings, dance recitals, etc..

I agree, the Tamron 28-75 and a 70-200 f4 would be a great combo and not too expensive

[crn3371]

Which lens are you the most unhappy with? The kit lens, or the 75-300. Also, budget has a lot to do with it. You're going to get recommendations for lenses ranging from a couple of hundred dollars, to over a thousand dollars. If you give a price range you might get some more helpful advice.

[rklepper]

Rather than the 70-200 f/4L, I would recomend the 200f/2.8L. Faster than the f/4, sharper, and it is light and inexpensive. You just can't beat the f/2.8. Do a search to see how many have sold their f/4's to get a faster lens.

[xxbodkinxx]

I would say that the to of my money spectrum would be something like the 70-200 f/4L

Ok so Im debating on the 70-200f/4L Tamaron 28-75 f/2.8 and the sigma 10-20

Now I am wondering if the 50 1.8 would cure my low light blues. If it does then the kit lens would suffice untill I can afford someting better.

Humm Im thinking the 70-200f/4L or the 10-20 what would you guys recomend out of the 2. I can't even stand mounting the 75-300 on my camera because everything looks so soft, then again a UWA would be alot of fun to play with.

[ayotnoms]

Unless you are wedded to the idea that most shots are better rendered as wide angle photos I would wager you'd get far more use of the 70-200.

Just one man's 2¢

Cheers

[steved110]

I would suggest sell your 75-300 and get the 70-200 f/4 - it's a superb lens as everyone says, and it makes a wonderful portrait lens, especially if you have a little room.
I can't get enough of mine! I sold my 75-300 to get this lens ( well, to help get it!) and I've had a great time with it. I find the focal length very versatile, and as i could not afford the 2.8 version, or wish to carry a lens that size around, there was no trouble deciding which one to get either ;)

Check this site out, it covers all the canon range in good detail, and gives lens recommendations for various purposes:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/

[sqjaw]

So you want something sharp and uwa [THEN] I hope you got deep pockets because this lens fills the bill:):):):)
Contax Zeiss Distagon 21mm f/2.8

Liker I said I hope you deep pockets

[liza]

I agree, the Tamron 28-75 and a 70-200 f4 would be a great combo and not too expensive

These are the only two zooms I use and would be a great starter combo for any new shooter. With that said, I later picked up the 200mm f/2.8L that Doc Klepper referred to in his post.

[xxbodkinxx]

Yep I think that is what Im going to do.
Get the 70-200 f/4L 1st


and

Hopefully shortly after that get the Tamaron 28-75 F/2.8

Then I will have a decent setup.

Canon 50 f/1.8
Sigma 105 f/2.8 Macro
Canon 70-200 f/4L
Tamaron 28-75 f/2.8

Then after that who knows prob the Canon 10-22.....