Would this lenschoice be yours ?

[loebas]

After reading all kind of reviews and asking questions i decided to add the following lenses to my D300 and 18-55 gear.


Canon 50-1.8 low light inside
Tamron 28-75 2.8 General purpose
Canon 70-200 2.8 Zoom range for "not attaking" wildlife (deer, fox, pigs etc), family, sportsgames of my kids etc

First I thought about the 70-200 f4.0, but as the wood Im often in is rather dark I think the 2.8 will better suite my needs.

As I also plan to buy an extender I think I will be better of with the 2.8.

Can you please give some comment on my considerations.
Looking forward to hear from you.

[eosster]

Nice choice, yeah If you need a fast lens, I would go for 70-200mm F/2.8 L, then F/4 is which I have. Both are nice though. The other two lens is fine choice.

[eosster]

BTW, my choice for my camera is 17-40mm F/4L(I have), 70-200mm F/4L(I have) and 50mm F/1.4 USM(my next purchase) or 35mm F/1.4 L(I really want this)and maybe 100mm F/2.8 Macro USM. This would be my choice, I would use 50mm F/1.4 USM or 35mm F/1.4 L for general shooting in low lights. Good luck setting up your lens system.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Loebas,

I'd take your list straight to the store!
All excellent choices :)

[gramps]

That looks like a good list, you may want to consider the 100 - 400 instead of the 70 - 200. You will probally be happier if you are shooting wildlife.

[loebas]

That looks like a good list, you may want to consider the 100 - 400 instead of the 70 - 200. You will probally be happier if you are shooting wildlife.

Thanks for your advice. I know 100-400 will be better for main goal wildlife, but I want the 70-200 for a more general purpose goal and as I read some good reviews when adding a converter on the 70-200 i think this can be a "good wildlife" lens.

[FlyingPete]

Canon 50-1.8 low light inside


Got one of these at the beginning of the week, love it! Great for narrow depths of field and low light, focus speed is not too shabby either considering it is not USM.

I think everyone should have this or its more expensive brother (50mm f/1.4) in their camera bag.

I am shooting a night concert is a couple of weeks, I am hoping the 50 will be my secret weapon!

[dr.bear]

You said 70-200 2.8 because you'll use it in the woods and in the dark. I'm guessing you won't be using a tripod/monopod in those situations so might I suggest you look at the IS version instead. It gives you a 3 stop advantage over the non-IS in hand held situations. Only disadvantage is the $$$.

[Fills]

You said 70-200 2.8 because you'll use it in the woods and in the dark. I'm guessing you won't be using a tripod/monopod in those situations so might I suggest you look at the IS version instead. It gives you a 3 stop advantage over the non-IS in hand held situations. Only disadvantage is the $$$.and WEIGHT! :D

[Olegis]

Canon 50-1.8 low light inside
Tamron 28-75 2.8 General purpose
Canon 70-200 2.8 Zoom range for "not attaking" wildlife (deer, fox, pigs etc), family, sportsgames of my kids etc

This is exactly what I have, along with the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro and the Tokina 17mm for wide-angle. All wonderful choices !

[Eric DeCastro]

no, mine would and is
17-40L
50 1.8
85 1.8 or 100 2.0
135 L