Lens help needed!

So I have my rebel xt with the kit lens right now. I really want to get a new lens before too long but I'm having trouble deciding.

I want to get the 24-70 f/2.8L but I'm not sure how good that focal range will be on a 1.6 crop camera. I do plan on upgrading to a full frame camera one day when they come down in price but that won't be for a few years yet because I will probably upgrade to a 30D (or similar) before I upgrade to a full frame. I'm wondering if it would be a better idea to get the 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens and use that until I do upgrade to a full frame. At that point, I could sell that lens and get the 24-70 to go with the full frame.

The only thing holding me back is that I'm not too thrilled about the focal range on the kit lens. It might just be that I'm a fairly new photographer and I'm not great at using it yet. I just find that I want more reach. I don't want to sacrifice the wide angle too much because I do use it.

I definately want to replace my kit lens with a better walk around lens. I guess I'm just concerned that I'll be spending a lot of money for a lens that is not that much different than my kit lens. I'm sure it is a much better lens, I'm just having doubts for some reason.

Also, could anyone who is using a 24-70 f/2.8L on a 1.6 crop camera chime in with how it works for a walk around lens?

Can you live with a 38mm field of view on the wide end? If you can the 24-70 f2.8L is hard to beat as a walk around on a 1.6x body, it gets you a usable 112mm FOV on the long end. If you need a true wide angle and need some reach you will most likely have to go to 2 lenses.

Yeah that is my biggest concern about the 24-70. I don't know if 38mm will be wide enough. I'm not sure how often I shoot at 18mm on my kit lens but I know I use it occasionaly.

Once I upgrade to a full frame body, the 24-70mm will be perfect but, like I said, that may be a ways off.

EDIT:

I should also say that I'm a complete newbie when it comes to photography. I have maybe 2,000 frames shot in total. I'm just getting into the hobby so the 24-70 might be overkill.

How about the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS lens? Almost the same price as the 24-70 L. You basically keep the wide aspect (even though 24 x 1.6 = 38.4 - 168 mm) and the length. Once you convert to full frame, it's even better. Just a thought.

I want f/2.8 without a doubt since I shoot at night more often than during the day.

I'm new too. I have an old 35-80 I need to replace. (talk about limited FOV)

I am close to buying the sigma 17-70. It would save you a lot of money compared to your other options - plus it covers a good range. It's not 2.8 all the way though. But I have a 50 1.8 I can use for low light anyway.

I did went for 24-70 as walkaround lens
But i have peleng 8mm for wide, I should probably get 10-20 as another lens

2.8 does make a difference inside

I guess the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM would be out of the question, then, given that it's not an L?

Do you feel you are missing something in your shots with the kit lens? I'm going to give you a totally different suggestion and say you save your money, spend $80 and get the 50 f/1.8. I think this lens is great for learning with eventhough it will seem difficult at first due to the fixed focal length. Since you say you are new to photography, I would concentrate more on learning technique and limitations of your camera/lenses you have before spending $1k on a high-end lens. Just a suggestion but it might help you decide what you really need to spend your money on since you seem a little torn right now.

I'm debating between that lens and the 24-70mm f/2.8L.

My main decision is whether or not 24mm will be wide enough on a 1.6 crop camera.

This is really the most important part. You could dump $1000+ into a new lens, but it's probably not going to make a huge improvement in your pictures. The important thing is that you LEARN. At the beginning, tecnique will be your limiting factor.


At the risk of sounding mean, if you havce only taken about 2,000 pictures so far, you probably don't know what you need. Some of the people here take that in a day, and even more casual photographers will do that in a week or two. What you really need to do is keep plugging away, learn the ways to make your camera get the shots you want. Photography is about more than cameras and lenses. Every shot is built on composition, aperture, exposure, shutter speed, lighting. Until you know how to make your camera work for you, experience is going to be your limiting factor, not your equipment.

inthedeckI guess the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM would be out of the question, then, given that it's not an L?

L Series lenses aren't the only lenses that will provide you with quality images. They are great lenses, but ruling a lens out simply because it doesn't have a red ring around the end makes me roll my eyes. There are quite a few lenses out there (Canon and 3rd party) that are great lenses that aren't L series, eg. 50mm f1.4, 85mm f2.8, 100mm Macro, etc. Just having L glass won't give you great pictures.

Take some time, and take some pictures. Don't worry about what you will do when you switch to FF. If you don't know what lenses you want now, then you don't really need to worry about what you are going to want in two years. I've seen some great shots with the XT, so don't just cast it aside. The camera is capable of more than you could imagine. As you learn what you need from your equipment, then worry more about buying new stuff.