20D Package Clarification Needed

[dtplink]

I've just joined this forum and I'm seriously considering buying a 20D. I'm a little confused about packages and lens speeds though.

Packages. It seems like the kits offer a body for $1249 with a Canon 18-55mm AF lens for $150 after current rebates. Body alone is $1249. The kit I think I want a package that includes a body and 17-85mm AF lens for $1899. Is there a reason why I should buy the kit with the 18-55mm lens and add the $500-600 17-85mm to the package? Do the lenses truly overlap? I'm used to using a 35mm, 55mm-Micro, 80-200mm zoom.

Lens Speed. The Canon lenses I'm looking at have speeds starting at f/3.5. I'm used to working with lenses in the f/1.4-2 range in the film world. Is the combination of ISO, image stabilization and so forth making these f/values not as important as they once were.

Please direct me to previous threads if this all has been covered before.

Former Nikon F/series user, current Leica D1 user.

[lordjim]

I do not see any reasons why you should buy both the 18-55 and the 17-85. They totally overlap and both are average lenses. If you are used to good lenses, you may be slightly disappointed.

An option would be to go with the 18-55 (the lens is worth the extra USD100 and it gives you a temporary "wide" angle until you upgrade ) and buy a Tamron 28-75 F2.8 XR Di LD (about USD400) (better and faster than the Canon 17-85).

A faster lens will give you more option for DOF and the ability to use the AF abilities of the 20D fully (which requires F2.8 or faster lenses). That being said, the AF of the 20D is so good with F4 lenses already that it probably makes little difference to use the extra abilities of the 20D.

Hope that helps.

[Medic1]

If your going to buy a package deal and want a decent quality lens get the 17-85. The 18-55 is an ok lens for a beginner, but I would have to say if your used to good lenses from when you shot film you may be fairly disapponted in the 17-85, let alone the 18-55.

[AjP]

it is really up to u, but I'm personaly bought body only and then separate lenses, depends on what u are shoting, better get something 28-135 IS USM, great walk around lense, and may be one wide angle... or if money not an issue get L lenses

[lostdoggy]

There is no reason to get either lens unless money is an issue. I would suggest to get the 18-55 kit lens and buy a tamron or sigma constant aperature 28-75 f/2.8 or 24-70 f/2.8, respectively. Then later you can invest in one of the three 70-200L lenses. As far as working with f/1.4 to f/2.0 in film lenses you can also get primes that are in that speed range for instance 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.2 & 1.8, 100 f/2.0, 135 f/2.0, etc. As far as zoom is concern I think the fastest lenses are constant f/2.8 and they are pretty heavy at that speed. The IS will give you 2 to 3 hand holdable stops.

[dtplink]

Thank you all for the useful tips. So far the 20D kit with 18-55mm lens and a Canon - 70-200 F2.8 L IS USM EF Lens is pulling me into its orbit. Now I must locate and heft the 5.5-6 pounds of technology to see how it handles.

[buginajar]

I notice some of you suggest the kit lens (18-55) and another lense in that range (Tamron 28-75 Canon 24-70). Why get two lenses that overlap?

[Andy_T]

Lens Speed. .. I'm used to working with lenses in the f/1.4-2 range in the film world.

Yes, but not with zoom lenses :wink:

Two very good primes from Canon that are very much usable for portraiture and sports are the 50/1.4 and the 85/1.8. There also are the superb 35/1.4 L, 85/1.2 L and 135/2.0 L, but these lenses are in the same price range as the 70-200/2.8 L.

I notice some of you suggest the kit lens (18-55) and another lense in that range (Tamron 28-75 Canon 24-70). Why get two lenses that overlap?


Because the Tamron 28-75/2.8 is a great lens with superb sharpness ... but 28 mm on a 1.6x crop body is the same as 45 mm on film ... not exactly wide.

The idea is to use the 18-55 kit lens in the 18-28 range (equivalent to 28 - 45 mm on a film body)

How do these lenses compare? I did some very quick unscientific test shots at 50 mm focal length to determine the sharpness of my lenses.

I got tack sharp images (my definition: sharp when viewed as 100% crop, which should be sufficient for significant enlargements, definitely overkill for small prints) using my Canon 50/1.8 @ f/2.8, my Tamron 28-75/2.8 @ f/4.0 and my Canon EF-S 18-55 @ f/8.

Most of Canon's consumer zoom lenses (e.g. 24-85, 28-105, 28-135 IS, 75-300) perform similar to the EF-S 18-55, while the L lenses normally are as sharp (or most likely a bit sharper) than the Tamron 28-75/2.8.

Bottom line ... all of these lenses are usable if you know the limitations, but the kit lens will maybe not be your optimal choice for low light situations :wink:

Based on others' tests I think that the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 will be as sharp @ f/2.0 ... they are next on my wish list.

For that reason, I also would suggest to get the 350$ Tamron 28-75/2.8 in addition to the wonderful 70-200/2.8 IS.

Best regards,
Andy

[buginajar]

For that reason, I also would suggest to get the 350$ Tamron 28-75/2.8 in addition to the wonderful 70-200/2.8 IS.

Best regards,
Andy

Ok, with that being said,.....I will only have the budget for 1 good lens when I buy my 20d.

What do you think about the kit + 50 f/1.8 II + Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM?

[Andy_T]

Buginajar ...

looks like a good plan to me.

After all, it will only be temporary :wink: if you continue reading the forum.

One thing to observe as far as the wonderfully sharp EF 50/1.8 lens is concerned ... the bokeh is not so great, which might make it less of a treat for portraiture. Take a look at this thread. (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=69785)

Best regards,
Andy