Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 19 Apr 2012 (Thursday) 13:58
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Your top 3 "bang for buck" lenses?

 
irispatch
Goldmember
Avatar
1,009 posts
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Maryland
     
May 31, 2012 13:04 |  #121

You might laugh but the old EF 28-70 3.5-4.5 can be had for ~$50-70 no need for IS it is compact and light plus it gives excellent images. Often referred to a poor mans L. Just try to find one they sell very quickly.
Next 100mm 2.8 very good lens sharp and portable
and the venerable 70-200 f4 excellent lenses lens.

Careful shopping and you have 3 very good lenses for under $900 total.


Canon 50D, Canon 100mm f/2.8 IS L, Canon 20-35mm f/2.8L, Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS and Kenko 1.4 TC :lol:
Gitzo G2228 with a Markins Q3, and assorted gadgets. :)
The Iris Patch

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
maximus_73
Senior Member
297 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2012
     
Jun 01, 2012 16:45 |  #122

Bang for the buck:
1. 70-200 f/4.0L non is.
2. 24-70 f/2.8L version I. Got it for $850.00 refurbished from Canon several years ago.


Cameras: Canon EOS M, FujiFilm X-T1| Lenses: FD 50mm 1.4, Fujinon 23mm 1.4, Fujinon 56 1.2, Zeiss 32mm 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
uOpt
Goldmember
Avatar
2,283 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Boston, MA, USA
     
Jun 01, 2012 21:05 |  #123

85mm f/1.8. Really good lens in every respect.

70-200mm f/4.0 non-IS used.

17-40L, in particular as a walkaround on a crop. Ever weather sealed.


My imagine composition sucks. I need a heavier lens.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Joaaso
Senior Member
Avatar
555 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Oslo, Norway
     
Jun 02, 2012 03:35 |  #124

Samyang 14/2.8, EF 85/1.8 and 200/2.8L II


aaso-photography (external link) | Flickr (external link)
5D Mk IV | 5D Mk II
EF 24-70/4L | EF 24-105/4L | Samyang 14/2.8 | TS-E 24/3.5L II | EF 35/1.4L II | EF 85/1.8 | EF 135/2L | EF 200/2.8L II | 1,4x TC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tupper
Tupperware Party Sheep
Avatar
2,432 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Sydney
     
Jun 02, 2012 03:43 |  #125

17-40 f/4, 85 f/1.8 and Sigma 30 f/1.4

I own the 17-40 and 85


Ewan
SONY A7r
1N - 5D2 - 15 2.8 - 17-40L- 24LII - 50L - 85 1.8 - 70-200 2.8
O-MD - 20 1.7 - 50 1.8 - 135 3.5

ewantupper.com (external link) - facebook fanpage (external link) - twitter (external link) - 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
garyeaton
Senior Member
Avatar
670 posts
Likes: 218
Joined Jul 2008
Location: South Carolina
     
Jun 02, 2012 13:29 |  #126

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 macro USM
Canon EF 135mm f/2 L USM
Canon EF 24-85mm F/3.5-4.5 USM


Gary Eaton www.garyeatonstudios.c​om (external link)
6D, 30D, 40D & XTi, Bogen tripods x2
24-85mm, 135mm f/2 L, 100mm f/2.8 macro L, 24-105mm L, 50mm STM, 85mm f/1.8, Flash: Yongnuo 600RT x2 & Novatron Kits x5
50mm f/1.4, 17-40mm L, 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 IS II, Sigma 150-600mm C

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CaptB412
Member
Avatar
208 posts
Likes: 404
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Boca Raton, FL
     
Jun 03, 2012 07:18 |  #127

85 f/1.8
17-40 f/4
70-200 f/4is

I know some have argued for the non is version of the 70-200, but the is in low light situations makes it a much bigger bang for the buck imo. I thought about putting the 135 f/2 in place of the 85 1.8 as it is my favorite lens, but I attempted to be a little more objective and put the 85 f/1.8


5DS R | EOS-R | 5D Mk III | EOS-M5 | G.A.S. Addict | Many Lenses | Flashes |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
uOpt
Goldmember
Avatar
2,283 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Boston, MA, USA
     
Jun 04, 2012 14:50 |  #128

CaptB412 wrote in post #14523776 (external link)
I know some have argued for the non is version of the 70-200, but the is in low light situations makes it a much bigger bang for the buck imo.

If the target is moving the non-IS f/2.8 can take that place, though.


My imagine composition sucks. I need a heavier lens.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
one2nite
Senior Member
Avatar
436 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Montreal
     
Jun 04, 2012 16:01 |  #129

Canon 50mm 1.8
Canon 85mm 1.8
Sigma 30mm 1.4
Tamron 70-200 2.8


Canon 6d +70d
Canon 17-40L / Sigma 50mm 1.4 / Canon 85mm 1.8 / Canon 18-135mm / Sigma 50-150 2.8 / Canon 580 EX / Gopro / EOS M

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
fritzk3
Member
239 posts
Joined Dec 2007
     
Jun 05, 2012 08:46 |  #130

riotshield wrote in post #14473050 (external link)
18-55mm
55-250mm
50mm 1.8 - if this is excluded, I would go with the 85mm 1.8

I would add the Tamron 17-50 non-VC, but at its current selling price of $474 AR new it's not such a bang for the buck anymore (although still the cheapest 2.8 zoom option).

I'd definitely agree on the 50/1.8 and the 55-250 IS. Third one is a bit tougher call. Granted, I have limited experience with Canon's lens lineup, but I tend to think it's a toss-up between the 18-55 IS and the 85/1.8. It really depends on your needs since they serve different functions - not to mention that the 85/1.8 costs about 3X what the 18-55 IS costs. If push came to shove and I could only have one, I'd probably say the 18-55 just for the versatility in range, and because I'd already have the 50/1.8 for low-light / portrait work.


Canon 40D • EF-S 18-55 IS • EF-S 55-250 IS EF 28-135 IS USM EF 50/1.8 EF 85/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,095 posts
Likes: 1303
Joined Nov 2005
Location: San Diego County, California, USA
     
Jun 05, 2012 09:49 |  #131

Let me choose TWO lenses for 1.6x cameras and list them in three categories...

LOW END...
Canon 18-55mm f/4-5.6 IS
Canon 55-250mm f/4-5.6

MID RANGE...
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8
Tamron 70-200mm f/4-5.6 VC

HIGH END...
Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS
Canon 70-200mm f/4L IS

These last two are certainly not inexpensive. However, IMO, they are worth every cent I paid for them and then some. I use them now on a 7D and a 40D. But, I shot an entire two week trip to China using these lenses on a 30D and a 40D. See my China galleries at the smugmug.com link below...

This combination is the best general purpose and travel lens duo I have ever used in over fifty years of photography; much of that time professional shooting.


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,095 posts
Likes: 1303
Joined Nov 2005
Location: San Diego County, California, USA
     
Jun 05, 2012 09:56 |  #132

Talley wrote in post #14293603 (external link)
Canon 70-200 F4 nonIS (I disagree the IS version being here because it's an extra 500 bucks just for IS)

I agree that the non-IS 70-200mm f/4L lens provides excellent image quality but, when I used this lens I was always constricted by the amount of light needed to keep the shutter speed high enough. Hand-holding the non-IS lens was often a bit chancy.

On the other hand, the 70-200mm f/4L IS can be hand held in far lower light levels. (1/60 and even 1/30 second). I use my IS model 4-5x more often than I could ever use the non-IS version. It costs about 70-80% more but I use it 400-500% more. That is a pretty good cost vs. value ratio for me!

Canon did not just add IS. The 70-200mm f/4L IS model is a better lens, better IQ, far better bokeh and it has somewhat better weather proofing.


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
uOpt
Goldmember
Avatar
2,283 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Boston, MA, USA
     
Jun 05, 2012 10:34 |  #133

RPCrowe wrote in post #14534071 (external link)
I agree that the non-IS 70-200mm f/4L lens provides excellent image quality but, when I used this lens I was always constricted by the amount of light needed to keep the shutter speed high enough. Hand-holding the non-IS lens was often a bit chancy.

On the other hand, the 70-200mm f/4L IS can be hand held in far lower light levels. (1/60 and even 1/30 second). I use my IS model 4-5x more often than I could ever use the non-IS version. It costs about 70-80% more but I use it 400-500% more. That is a pretty good cost vs. value ratio for me!

Canon did not just add IS. The 70-200mm f/4L IS model is a better lens, better IQ, far better bokeh and it has somewhat better weather proofing.

Yeah but if your subject is moving the IS won't do it, and then not even a tripod helps.

In that case you can spend the same money on either the f/4 IS or f/2.8 non-IS and the latter will do better for moving subject. The premium for IS on the f/4 (100% roughly) is just a lot of money, that's why many don't place that lens in the bang-for-buck excellence category.


My imagine composition sucks. I need a heavier lens.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
randy98mtu
Goldmember
Avatar
3,591 posts
Gallery: 328 photos
Likes: 1546
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Michigan
     
Jun 05, 2012 10:36 |  #134

85 1.8
135L

Can't decide on a third. Never had a drop of regret of either of those lenses. Love my 35L, but I've had a few struggles with it. Maybe the 28 1.8? Really all the Canon USM primes (28/50/85/100) are fantastic value lenses.


Canon EOS M6 - EOS R - EF, EF-M and RF lenses
Donate for Forum Costs

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Strayz
Senior Member
Avatar
691 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Alaska
     
Jun 05, 2012 17:19 |  #135

Here is my short list of 3 bang for buck.

Tamron 28-75mm F2.8
Canon 70-200mm F4 non IS
Canon 85mm F1.8


Back to learning after a 5ish year break from photography

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

54,717 views & 0 likes for this thread
Your top 3 "bang for buck" lenses?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is sunisland227
1125 guests, 296 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.