What goes in between ?

[OsRuS]

Hi Guys,
Well, I've got the 20D, I've got the 17-40 f/4 L and the 70-200 F/4 L with a 1.4 TC.
Like the rest I'm addicted to this Canon stuff. What suggestions for a lens to fill the gap?. I've got the 50 f/1.8 but it's not an L.
Any ideas?

[I Simonius]

Hi Guys,
Well, I've got the 20D, I've got the 17-40 f/4 L and the 70-200 F/4 L with a 1.4 TC.
Like the rest I'm addicted to this Canon stuff. What suggestions for a lens to fill the gap?. I've got the 50 f/1.8 but it's not an L.
Any ideas?

50 1.4
it's as good as L, just cheaper. and you need a fast lens. yes you do ;)

[blue_max]

A second for Simon's suggestion.

He's right you know.

Graham

[condyk]

Sigma 50-500mm Bigma ... just kidding :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :p

[GPR1]

If you want to spend the cash you'll love the 24-70 2.8L. I have exactly your set of lenses, with the 24-70 (and a 100mm macro). It's a great choice, but hard on the wallet.

Greg

[blue_max]

If you want to spend the cash you'll love the 24-70 2.8L. I have exactly your set of lenses, with the 24-70 (and a 100mm macro). It's a great choice, but hard on the wallet.

Greg


Hello Greg, I am just about to buy that as well. He should still have the 50mm f1.4 as well though.

Dave, don't know about the Bigma, but he should consider your Tamron 28-75 for the same money as the 50! (see market place). Great seller and regular poster.

Let us know what you choose.

Graham

[ayotnoms]

50mm f/1.4 ...a solid recommendation

[summerwind4]

ahh the 50 f/1.4......a must have prime if there is one, but since you are using zooms already, you may find the 50 to be a tough lens to use at times.
the 24-70 is really cool if you don't mind corking a tank around all day and you can live with it's limited zoom range.
if you can, give the 17-85IS a field test and see how you like it.
i say this not becuase i own one, but because the lens is a lot better than some of the bogus reviews i and a lot of others were reading about.

[Sean-Mcr]

Just got Back from a weeks holiday in Edinburgh and used a 50 1.4 90% of the time.

Some shots taken with the 50 last week http://www.pbase.com/sean_mcr/edinburgh

[scr7b]

I would also say that nobody was ever sorry they bought the 85mm f/1.8...

If my kit was stolen, this would be the first lens I'd replace.

[OsRuS]

Thanks for all the great advise. I will be taking a trip to my local store and giving the 50 f/1.4 a test run along with the other sugestions.
Cheers guys

[tombryan]

The 50 1.4 is a must have. But also if you want a great zoom that's not so hard on your budget at the moment, the Tamron 28-75 xr di 2.8 is a really good lens at a really good value. I think I only paid around $320-$360. Something like that. It overlaps a touch but that doesn't hurt a think. I've got teh 16-35 on one body, and the 28-75 on my other most of the time at weddings. I like the 28-75 for those portrait type shots or half body with small groups. Even if you don't do weddings, the Tamron is a great all around lens.

[I Simonius]

I would also say that nobody was ever sorry they bought the 85mm f/1.8...

If my kit was stolen, this would be the first lens I'd replace.

I just bought that lens and I agree - Its a cracker ;)

[OsRuS]

What about the 26-135 IS, a lot of peple seem to like it but the price over here in the UK is quite high.

[condyk]

I had that lens (you mean the 28-135 IS I guess) and sold it very quickly. It is good enough but not to the standard of the excellent pieces you have already. I think you will be used to high quality and you may well become disappointed in the IS quite quickly.

At such a vital range I would look at the well regarded Tamron 28-75 2.8 (which I bought to replace my ex Canon IS and been much happier with) and the SIgma 24-70mm 2.8 EX DG Macro which I would recommend equally.

If you don't want a zoom I would opt for the 1.4 Canon as already suggested by others. The 85mm overlaps with the excellent 70-200mm and doubt it will add the day to day value something lower down the focal range can add just at the moment.

Good luck ...

[darkdrakon]

sell the 17-40 and buy a 24-70 2.8 LOL

[Sean-Mcr]

I also have the 85 1.8 it was the only other lens i had we me for my week in Edinburgh. I love that lens also but the 50 was on 90% of the time. If i could just have 1 it would have to be the 50, but then i'm glad i have the 2:)

[Alexandre Gabriel]

50 f/1.4 AND 60mm f/2.8 macro if you like macro.

[FScott]

Hmmm. It all depends on why you need to fill the gap. You have the 50mm 1.8 which is a fine sharp lens already in the gap between your two zooms. You aren't going to do much better on sharpness. If you really need that extra stop, need the distance scale or you really use the 50mm a lot then get the 1.4. It has much better build quality and has a USM motor (not a ring USM but an older design). If it were me and the money was just burning a hole in my pocket then I would get the 85mm 1.8. It will be my next lens. There is of course the macro as well. I would get the 100mm instead of the 60mm as it gives you more working distance. It all depends on what you are going to do with the lens.

-- Scott.

[OsRuS]

sell the 17-40 and buy a 24-70 2.8 LOL
Whats the thoughts between Canon and Sigma on this lens??

The price difference is HUGE...

[condyk]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=81291

The review of the Sigma is the new DG Macro version ... there are a few older versions same focal range which do not seem to do so well.

[OsRuS]

Hmmm. It all depends on why you need to fill the gap. You have the 50mm 1.8 which is a fine sharp lens already in the gap between your two zooms. You aren't going to do much better on sharpness.

Most of my photos are take in natural light so the extra stop is not that important. I do a lot of traveling and take pictures of anything that takes my interest.

[johnlo]

50 f1.4 is nice to have. I recently got one for myself... just in time to photograph a indoor wedding w/ low light.

[condyk]

I'm a big traveller too and from experience the smaller and lighter the better for a walkaround ... and good to be unobtrusive. I would therefore go with the Tamron as it is light, performs very well indeed, and doesn't look too flashy. As you now, a bit of decent zoom really helps frame and shoot opportunties that arise and which you have little control over.

Best of luck with your choice. Do you have any travel shots posted anywhere?

[OsRuS]

I'm a big traveller too and from experience the smaller and lighter the better for a walkaround ... and good to be unobtrusive. I would therefore go with the Tamron as it is light, performs very well indeed, and doesn't look too flashy. As you now, a bit of decent zoom really helps frame and shoot opportunties that arise and which you have little control over.

Best of luck with your choice. Do you have any travel shots posted anywhere?

Thanks for your input. No my photos are for personal use only as others may not think they are as good as I do.