In which order would you buy these lenses?

[OceanView]

I recently purchased the 20D with the standard 18-55mm kit lens and now want to start purchasing some additional lenses for my collection.

Of the following list, in which order would you purchase these if these were your choices?

By the way, I shoot everything from flowers to landscapes and buildings.

EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

EF 70-200mm f4L USM

EF 85mm f/1.2L USM

EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

Thanks all.

[condyk]

In which order to you love to take photo's? Seems to me I want the lenses first that I will use the most for what I love to do. Also depends on your cash flow at a given time. From the list you have, I'd get the 17-40 and 70-200 and 50mm ... but that's me!

[Sean-Mcr]

24-70 then 70-200 give you a good working distance until you can save for the 17-40. With those 3 you're coverd from 17 to 200mm

Then i'd get the fantastic 50

Finally the amazing 85

That's if i were you

[Wolverine27]

I recently purchased the 20D with the standard 18-55mm kit lens and now want to start purchasing some additional lenses for my collection.

Of the following list, in which order would you purchase these if these were your choices?

By the way, I shoot everything from flowers to landscapes and buildings.

EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

EF 70-200mm f4L USM

EF 85mm f/1.2L USM



Thanks all.

1. EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
2. EF 70-200mm f4L USM
3. EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
4. EF 85mm f/1.2L USM
5. EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

[cmM]

it really depends on how you like to shoot stuff, what focal lengths you're more confortable with, etc... it's really a matter of preference in the end. They're all fine lenses. I'd buy 50, then 70-200, then 17-40, etc...

[willg]

70-200
17-40
50
then the 85mm 1.8 not 1.2

[AjP]

it really depends what you are doin' for me personaly

1. EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
2. (no) EF 17-40mm f/4L USM I need 16-35 2.8 L
3. (no) EF 70-200mm f4L USM need 70-200 2.8 IS L
don't need it EF 85mm f/1.2L USM
already have EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

[OceanView]

it really depends what you are doin' for me personaly

1. EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
2. (no) EF 17-40mm f/4L USM I need 16-35 2.8 L
3. (no) EF 70-200mm f4L USM need 70-200 2.8 IS L
don't need it EF 85mm f/1.2L USM
already have EF 50mm f/1.4 USM


Your replacements would be ideal, however, I am limited in my budget at this time.

Planning on buying one lens per month.

[who me?]

Since you already have the 18-55 that works and covers a decent range and your noted preferences in shooting, my choices would be
70-200 - fills the range you are missing and would work for flowers at it's close focusing distance
17-40 - good for those landscapes and buildings and even flowers at close focus (nicely, I might add)
50 - with the 20D and it's 1.6 crop, this is close to the 85 on a full frame camera
24-70 - fills the intermediate zoom gap
85

[OceanView]

Since you already have the 18-55 that works and covers a decent range and your noted preferences in shooting, my choices would be
70-200 - fills the range you are missing and would work for flowers at it's close focusing distance
17-40 - good for those landscapes and buildings and even flowers at close focus (nicely, I might add)
50 - with the 20D and it's 1.6 crop, this is close to the 85 on a full frame camera
24-70 - fills the intermediate zoom gap
85

Hey, I'm in 92831 too!

[Andy_T]

My order...

- 70-200/2.8 instead of 4.0 (money saved by 85/1.8 instead of 85/1.2)
then you have a wide range covered, which is important, as you will have to wait a month longer.
- 24-70/2.8 to get the standard range covered
- 50/1.4 or 85/1.8, depending on what you personally prefer for portraits
- 17-40 to replace the 18-55 as your landscape lens
- remaining 85/1.8 or 50/1.4 to complete your arsenal

Best regards,
Andy

[OceanView]

My order...

- 70-200/2.8 instead of 4.0 (money saved by 85/1.8 instead of 85/1.2)
then you have a wide range covered, which is important, as you will have to wait a month longer.
- 24-70/2.8 to get the standard range covered
- 50/1.4 or 85/1.8, depending on what you personally prefer for portraits
- 17-40 to replace the 18-55 as your landscape lens
- remaining 85/1.8 or 50/1.4 to complete your arsenal

Best regards,
Andy

Are you recommending the 70-200/2.8 non IS or IS?

[SAZABI]

I got 17-40 1st, then 70-200, now planning on 24-70.


however, if i can do it again, i go 24-70 1st, then 17-40, last 70-200...

[eosnob]

I recently purchased the 20D with the standard 18-55mm kit lens and now want to start purchasing some additional lenses for my collection.

Of the following list, in which order would you purchase these if these were your choices?

By the way, I shoot everything from flowers to landscapes and buildings.

EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

EF 70-200mm f4L USM

EF 85mm f/1.2L USM

EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

Thanks all.

1. 70-200 f/4L - it's not so expensive, and extends your focal length coverage up to 200mm.

2. 85mm f/1.8 instead of f/1.2L cause it's still a fast prime without the cost implications.

3. 17-40L to retire the kit 18-55.

4. 50 f/1.4 to plug the 40-70mm gap, and another stella prime, good for indoor low-light shooting.

5. 24-70 f/2.8L if you feel you still need this zoom range, as a walkaround. I personally find I don't use my Tamron 28-75 so much.

[scott stokes]

I agree with Andy I would get the 70-200 2.8 instead of f4 then 24-70 2.8,50 1.4,17-40,85 1.8

[Andy_T]

Are you recommending the 70-200/2.8 non IS or IS?

Non IS, actually.
Although I know that the IS version is an incredible lens, the price difference would just be too much for me.
Still, if you don't get the 85/1.2, the IS version would be in the budget :wink:

Best regards,
Andy

[Wildewinds]

I wouldn't get the 17-40 if I had the 24-70. That's a lot of money for a lens that overlaps so much. I'd go for the canon 10-22 or tokina 12-24.

Order of purchase depends on what you're shooting. Start with the 24-70 for sure, then either the wide angle lens if you're into landscape or the 70-200 if you're into portaits/sports/etc.

[Camo 757]

1. 24-70MM (picking one up soon)
2. 70-200MM 2.8 IS (trading my f4 in)
3. 16-35MM 2.8 (skip the primes) or Tokina 12-24MM (I have it and it is nice)

That is THE Setup

[lostdoggy]

I recently purchased the 20D with the standard 18-55mm kit lens and now want to start purchasing some additional lenses for my collection.

Of the following list, in which order would you purchase these if these were your choices?

By the way, I shoot everything from flowers to landscapes and buildings.

EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

EF 70-200mm f4L USM

EF 85mm f/1.2L USM

EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

Thanks all.

The three lenses that I could without is the
24-70 f/2.8L
85 f/1.2L
50 f/1.4

The Kit lens covers 17-55
so in lens progression the logical order would be:
70-200 f/2.8L IS (not the f/4)
24-70 F/2.8 EX (Sigma) (or Tamron equiv) [money better spend on the 70-200 f/2.8L IS]
1.4X TC
2.0X TC

Then to replace the Kit lens
16-35 f/2.8L

Then for more range:
100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS

Now you're covered from 16mm through 560
or with crop factor: 25.6mm through 896mm

I don't know what kind of photography you are into, but a 50 f/1.4 & 85mm f/1.2prime is not useful unless you plan to do alot of low light/natural light photography. Especially the 85 its more a conversation piece then a necessity the focal length is already covered by the 70-200 f/2.8 IS. Since it is and IS lens you can stop down an additional 3 stops

[RbrtPtikLeoSeny]

If I were you I'd knock out the most expensive lenses. It's always easier to go down the hill than up it. So, for landscape, buildings, flowers, ect I think you'll get the most use out of the 24-70 f/2.8L to start with. That'll be a good addition to your kit lens. Then the 85mm f/1.2 will add some more reach and be a great indoor lens. Would save the 17-40L for later since you have the kit lens for wide angle. So, I think you'll be yerning for a 70-200mm f/4L for telephoto. Fourth, 17-40L to get rid of that kit lens, and last 50mm f/1.4 even though I think that'd be kind of a useless purchase....

In order:
24-70 f/2.8L
85mm f/1.2L
70-200mm f/4L
17-40mm f/4L
50mm f/1.8

[Sean-Mcr]

As he asked what lenses we would buy first out of those lense and what not what we'd actually buy i gave him what order i'd buy those lenses. But they're not the lenses i'd choose for myself

What i'm thinking of doing is getting another 16-35 and then the 70-200 F2.8L IS to go with my 50 1.4 and 85 1.8

[sjprg]

I have all of them. Save yourself a LOT of money don't buy any of them except the 50mm f1.4 or better yet, wait and buy the new Sigma 30mm if you need the low light capability. Get a Sigma 18-200mm for a walkaround, and shoot that for several months before getting carried away with the lense hype that goes on in the forums. If you don't need a longer lense than the 18-55 that you already have, shoot that for at least 1000 images before jumping into more lenses. If you need a longer lense than 200mm(~300mm FOV) get a Sigma 50-500mm. I think the 70-200 is way over rated and is a lense that was designed for FF film cameras. The new lenses are much better designed.