Hello... I have been recently been posting over at the camera body sections when I was trying to decide between the 60D vs 7D. I've now decided to get the 60D.
I think I want to order through the CLP and figure this would be a good time to get a new lens because I can also get another 20% a refurb lens when I buy a refurb body, so instead of paying a few extra hundred dollars in 6mos for a new lens, it makes sense to get one now.
Currenly I have an XTI with the kit lens 18-55 (non IS, it's an older model) and the canon 50 1.4 and a quantaray 70-300 tele-macro lens (came with my camera kit 5 yrs ago), 430 EXII flash. I don't use the flash much as I prefer to use natural light when possible and adjust camera settings to avoid the flash.
I'm still in the beginning stages of learning manual, and that's all I shoot these days. What I shoot is my kids (indoors and poorly lit house, and outside), at school events (possible future plays, etc), simple sports (child aged baseball, soccer games), family bday/holiday gatherings, travel (ie Disney, ocean, lake, camping), I'd like to get alittle landscape in there too, flowers... basically alittle of everything. Like I said though, I am learning still. But like the ability to be creative.
I can purchase the 60d body prebundled with the 18-135 IS kit thru the CLP.
I can purchase the body only thru the clp.
I can purchase the body with a different lens...I was thinking either the 17-55 IS, the 24-70, 24-105.
I like the range of the current 18-55 kit, but sometimes wish I had more reach. But, I am leaning towards the 17-55 because of f2.8 and the fact that I do shoot indoors alot too.
I don't want to be changing lenses too much (hard with the little ones around), and alittle concerned the 17-55 won't be long enough in some situations, but I want a lens that will be good in low light and give me some flexibility. It's hard to catch he kids when the are active and I want all 4 of them in the shot (ages 1 thru 10), so with my 50 mm prime it can be tough.
I'm also wondering that the 17-55 paired with the 50 1.4 is overkill, but I do like the artsy ability that is there using it down to f1.4-1.8.
I have concidered the 24-70 2.8, but I think I may miss the wider angle of the 18-55 kit lens I have now, plus I hear it's called the "brick" and think this could get alittle heavy. thus why the 17-55 2.8 is what I'm concidering. I've also concidered the 24-105 4.0, but concerned about low light (and not having the wider angle too). If the 18-85 was a 2.8 I'd have gone that route, shucks!
Or should I just get the 18-135 IS that it comes bundled with and keep learning for a year or so and then upgrade (at a higher price though obviously :/ )
I keep going back and forth on the lens choice, I need to get this figured out so I can order the cameara I guess I can make due with my crappy 70-300 that I have for when I need the reach for plays or sports since right now it's the least of the photos that are being taken now.