If I choose 20D body only, what lens?

[busyone]

I am contemplating getting the 20D body only instead of the kit. I own no other canon or canon-compatible lenses yet.

If I go the body only route, any suggestions on 1 or 2 basic lenses?
I shoot mostly people and landscapes. Will use both indoors and outdoors.

[Jon]

Looked at the Top 10 Recommended Lenses Sticky (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=56752)?

[cdhender]

Budget?

[lordjim]

I would recommend that you rather get the kit with the 18-55 EF-S. The lens is cheap, not bad and can always help until you can get a nicer wide angle lens. Then, I would probably add the 24-70L (or a cheap alternative such as the Tamron 28-75) and one of the 70-200L (the cheapest will be the 70-200F4L). Well, unless you need a good wide angle lens first.

[busyone]

Thanks for the recos. I will look into all of them.

[jfred]

50mm f1.8 is a great little lens, and often overlooked
the tamron 28-75 is usually my "walk around lens", but is a little bit heavy

both are pretty good for both people and landscapes. I wouldn't part with either!

[deedas]

Tamron 28-75 for sure. :) I love that lens.

[lancea]

Hi busyone. I'd also recommend the kit lens as very good value. If you have the budget, the 17-85 EF-S would be a better option. While it wouldn't be described as an indoor lens, Image Stabilisation and the 20D's low-noise high ISO capability mean it will often be usable indoors without flash.

A 50mm 1.8 would give you a sharp low-light lens at an excellent price, but it wouldn't be suitable for landscapes.

[Mike H]

The budget will be a big factor in deciding what to do, but if you can swing it, consider the 17-40/4L and 70-200/4L combination. For the uses you've described, this is a great combination. The only thing you would lack is the ability to do low level, ambient light work. If you needed the latter capability, there are lenses that will get you there; which to get will depend on the distances to your subjects and how much of the frame you want them to fill.

Mike H

[lostdoggy]

On a Budget get the Kit lens and the 55-200
Deep Pocket get the EF-S 17-85 IS (personally I don't like this lens because its a EF-S) and the EF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS
and since these are not lenses 1.4x and 2.0x convertors.

[RbrtPtikLeoSeny]

The tamron 28-75 f/2.8 lens is a kick butt walk around lens. Then there's the fast, sharp, amazing 70-200mm f/4L lens good for portrait, exceptional for sports, decent for large animal photography. Ummmmmm I've always thought the 100mm f/2.8 macro would be a good lens too. Good all around lens... macro photography, portrait, large animals, good walk around lens. All under 600 bucks.

[mdm]

I agree on getting the kit lens. Then you can take your time and research whats best for you. Don't get in any hurry you'll get plenty of helpful info from this site.

[Lesmac]

I'd start with the kit lens, then progress possibly to the 17-40 F4L, if you are shooting landscapes, I'd also consider filters (polarizer, grads), possibly a tripod, and most definitely a hot-shoe spirit level (around $10)
Hope this helps

Les

http://lesmclean.photoblink.com/

[luckyart60]

I spent many hours trying to choose the right lens to buy for my needs. I think that I got it right check my lens etc

[kenyc]

I bought the 20D kit with the EFS 17-85 is lens and it's a darn fine lens.

KAC

[lancea]

... and most definitely a hot-shoe spirit level (around $10)
Absolutely. Mine ended up costing substantially more than that once postage was added, but it's very handy. Since you are interested in landscapes, busyone, it's won't be long before you try a panorama (even with 2 or 3 shots). My first panorama revealled that I have no concept at all of what is horizontal :)

But Lesmac - let me add my admiration to that you've already received for your portfolio. Very nice indeed.

[milou]

As a 300D owner, I'm in a similar position as like a twit, I recently tried out the 20D + 17-40L at my local London Camera Exchange - it's almost fatal doing these things...