What should I buy Next in Lenses

[MichelM]

During a business trip to NYC, I picked up the Canon 70-200 L IS at Adorama. I wanted to buy the Lense in Canada, but the price was somewhat much to high. So I bougth the gray market version. When I open the box and looked at the guarantee, its in french and mentions Canada. Sorry I am going unto another topic..

My main question is what do you think my next lense purchase should be. I currently own the following :

17-40L mm
70-200L IS F2.8 with 1.4 converter
28-105 mm (Not an L lense, first purchase)

I do no special photography but enjoy landscape, some family pictures and I hope to do some wildlife when I travel to Florida later this year.

To get back to my question, two of them know:

1) Should I upgrade from the non L 28-105mm to a similar L type lense ?
2) Kept what I have and get something in the Prime family
3) Buy high tech shares and hope I can sell them and buy the replacement for the 1D when it is announced.

My general inclination in terms of lenses is that I prefer to invest in excellent quality lenses as there product life cycle tends to outlast most digital cameras. Any idea or opinion ?

[Jim Larson]

You now have three lenses.

What do YOU think you need in terms of focal range?


If I had your lenses, I would buy a 50/1.4 prime and leave the 28-105 at home.

But first, take lots of pictures.

[Belmondo]

The 24-70 f/2.8L is the most used lens in my bag. If I had to give them all up but one, that's the one I'd keep.

[pfb]

50mm 1.4 prime...

[CyberDyneSystems]

Like Jim says,.

depends on what you want to do,. are you itching to replce that 28-105? If so then the obvious choice is indeed the 24-70mm f/2.8

Or,. look at some of the sweet primes,. 135mm, 85mm, 50mm.. and don't forget the 100mm macro :)

But,. if you were me,. you'd think all your lenses were to short! (I like birds! :mrgreen: ) in which case you'd be looking at a long telephoto zoom or prime ...

[chris.bailey]

50mm 1.4 USM. Should be in every serious snappers bag.

[DaveG]

Perhaps a 100mm macro. This gives you a lens that will let you shoot things that you can't do right now. The 50 f1.4 is also a good choice, especially if you need speed in that focal length as I did.

[Longwatcher]

I would get the 50/1.4 and then the 24-70/2.8L and finally a 100-400L
Then you basically have the zoom range covered (except for 16mm, which you might consider later) and can concentrate on the primes.

Going back to an old line;
only $54,000 and the 1200mm left to go.

[Kevin M]

From what you descibe as your requirements -if I had the first two lenses on your list I would consider that I had lenses licked . - if I occasionaly got the notion to photograph wildlife at a distance I would hire a lens.

A macro lens is handy to have.

[FotoPhreak]

Many of you have recommended the 50mm f1.4 ...

Is it worth paying the extra money over the f1.8?

[motophoto]

A while ago, while out and about, i had the misfortune of loosing my 50mm 1.4

Seeing as how i really needed a quick prime, i was forced to shop at the local electronics superstore.

The 50mm 1.8 was the only lens they had that was tolerable. Since then i have yet to replace it with another 1.4.

If i could do it all over agian, i would have just got the 1.8 in the first place, then treated myself to a good steak dinner for the rest of the week.

[motophoto]

...and leave the 28-105 at home.

But first, take lots of pictures.

by the way, i second this opinion.

[westfalcon1]

I really like the 28-135 is lens. Its sharp and very versatile. get rid of the 28-105. My lab sends me back soft focus on this lens when I use it. I like all the lenses others are recommending too. You really need a faster than 2.8 lens in your bag and the 50's...either one will fill the niche.

[Tom W]

I really like the 28-135 is lens. Its sharp and very versatile. get rid of the 28-105. My lab sends me back soft focus on this lens when I use it. I like all the lenses others are recommending too. You really need a faster than 2.8 lens in your bag and the 50's...either one will fill the niche.

It depends on which 28-105 you have. If you've got the f/3.5-4.5 28-105, it is a sharp lens. I'd hate to replace that one with something optically similar for just a little more range on the long end (though the IS may be worth the change). L glass is another story, of course.

If, however, you have the "kit" 28-105 f/4-5.6 lens then it is easily worthwhile to replace it with the 28-135 IS.

[AndrewEllinas]

50mm F1.8.

Its cheap, very sharp and with the 1.6x effective focal length multiplier is a great length for portraits.

[Tom W]

50mm F1.8.

Its cheap, very sharp and with the 1.6x effective focal length multiplier is a great length for portraits.

Agreed! I have an older series I model, but its a very good lens.