UWA? Macro? People? Tele? Decisions...

Hey guys, well I'm having a little delema.

I'd like to buy a new lense soon, but I can't decide what to buy! My budget is $550 and that's plenty of space for the lenses I'm looking at...

My only problem is I don't know what to get! I'd like to delve into different sides of photography, namely macro, landscapes, and people photography, but I can't decide which I should try/add next. Here is what I'm looking at:

Macro
Canon Telephoto EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

Landscapes/UWA Fun
Tokina Zoom Super Wide Angle AF 12-24mm f/4
Sigma Zoom Super Wide Angle 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM
Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle SP 11-18mm f/4.5-5.6

People Photography
Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8

Telephoto
Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

Both lenses that I currently own are VERY dissatisfying...when I zoom up on any image to 100%, I constantly get unsharp images, it is very frustrating. I will be doing a focus test later this week to determine if they are flawed lenses or something strange like that.

Questions like this only you can answer

Macro
Canon Telephoto EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro - how much Macro you're going to shoot? It'll probably sit in the bag 99% of the time
Landscapes/UWA Fun
Tokina Zoom Super Wide Angle AF 12-24mm f/4 - nice lens. I have one but not use it muchSigma Zoom Super Wide Angle 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM - another nice one. It's 10mm vs 12mm
Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle SP 11-18mm f/4.5-5.6 - not much talk about this one
People Photography
Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 - this is what you need, 17mm is pretty wide, not 12mm wide but wide enough to give you a good capture.
Telephoto
Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM - this is probably the best of the bunch. You will get an L lens and a future empty pocket.

With the Tokina 16-50 not currently available, I'd say you need something like the Sigma 18-50 f2.8, Tamron 17-50 f2.8, or the Sigma 17-70. Something along those lines...

The Canon 100mm can double as a portrait lens. I personally like using my Sigma 70-200mm as a portrait lens. It all depends on what you are going to do the most. You could get a set of kenko extention tubes as well for about $100.00. I use them on my Sigma 70-200mm all the time...

LightRules wrote in post #2102697
With the Tokina 16-50 not currently available, I'd say you need something like the Sigma 18-50 f2.8, Tamron 17-50 f2.8, or the Sigma 17-70. Something along those lines...

LOL I didn't mention the Tokina 16-50...I really wish it was out, but it won't be for a great while so the Tamron 17-50 will do if I select that range.

4x4rock wrote in post #2102633
Questions like this only you can answer

Macro
Canon Telephoto EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro - how much Macro you're going to shoot? It'll probably sit in the bag 99% of the time
Landscapes/UWA Fun
Tokina Zoom Super Wide Angle AF 12-24mm f/4 - nice lens. I have one but not use it muchSigma Zoom Super Wide Angle 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM - another nice one. It's 10mm vs 12mm
Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle SP 11-18mm f/4.5-5.6 - not much talk about this one
People Photography
Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 - this is what you need, 17mm is pretty wide, not 12mm wide but wide enough to give you a good capture.
Telephoto
Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM - this is probably the best of the bunch. You will get an L lens and a future empty pocket.

Hmm, good points 4x4rock, I'll keep those in mind. I think I can remove the UWA lenses from my thoughts, cause I don't think they'll get used as much now that I think of it.

either the sp 17-50mm or ef 70-200mm, especially so cause you're replacing the sigma superzoom.

Buy an UWA

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #2104791
Buy an UWA

Sigma 10-20

I was in exactly the same boat a month ago.

I bought extension tubes to satisfy my macro needs and strapped them to the nifty 50, it was the right choice as my garden at uni now has no plants = few insects!

Now in the end I chose the 70-200F4L, reasons being the extra reach, the L factor and wanted to shoot some of my mates playing sports and motorsport events.

Part of me wishes I had the UWA 10-22 though and its on my list of things to get still.

You just need to think what you'll use more.

jcw122 wrote in post #2102590
Hey guys, well I'm having a little delema.

I'd like to buy a new lense soon, but I can't decide what to buy! My budget is $550 and that's plenty of space for the lenses I'm looking at...

My only problem is I don't know what to get! I'd like to delve into different sides of photography, namely macro, landscapes, and people photography, but I can't decide which I should try/add next. Here is what I'm looking at:

Macro
Canon Telephoto EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

Landscapes/UWA Fun
Tokina Zoom Super Wide Angle AF 12-24mm f/4
Sigma Zoom Super Wide Angle 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM
Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle SP 11-18mm f/4.5-5.6

People Photography
Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8

Telephoto
Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

Both lenses that I currently own are VERY dissatisfying...when I zoom up on any image to 100%, I constantly get unsharp images, it is very frustrating. I will be doing a focus test later this week to determine if they are flawed lenses or something strange like that.

What you might want to consider if you get the 100mm macro (excellent lens) is the stratagy I used of pairing that with the very sharp 200 f2.8L rather than a tele zoom.

If you do want a tele zoom you should consider holding until you can aford the IS version of the 70-200 f4.

For the landscape stuff looking at the UW you have ammitted the EF-S 10-22, an excellent lens - is this because of cost?

What about the normal zoom range, ie the 17-40 f4L or will you stick with the kit lens for the moment (or do you not have that?).

For people you 50mm would be good and the 100mm macro would also work when you want longer reach.

Try and think about how you will develope your system over the next couple of years.

JCW122,

I would consider the Canon EF 28-105MM EF MArk II for $229.00 at B+H. Go to this link: http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …SA&addedTroughT​ype=search

Then look at a WA prime...perhaps the Sigma 20MM f/1.4 or similar Canon WA.

The 28-105 Mark II is also a "MACRO" lens and takes great close ups. This is the lens I used to study various focal lenghts before I decided what lenses to add to my kit. I am giving this lens and one of my Rebel 350s to my daughter so she can learn as I did. It is not the fastest lens (f/3.5 to f/4.5) but you can crank up the ISO in low light situations.

Good luck on your selections,

Well to satisfy my people photo needs, I think I may decide on actually buying a Tamron 28-75 2.8....the pictures it takes are INCREDIBLE looking at the thread here on it...I like the range too and it would complement future upgrades of the 70-2004L or a UWA lense.

Pete-eos wrote in post #2105122
I was in exactly the same boat a month ago.

I bought extension tubes to satisfy my macro needs and strapped them to the nifty 50, it was the right choice as my garden at uni now has no plants = few insects!

Now in the end I chose the 70-200F4L, reasons being the extra reach, the L factor and wanted to shoot some of my mates playing sports and motorsport events.

Part of me wishes I had the UWA 10-22 though and its on my list of things to get still.

You just need to think what you'll use more.

Hey! Thanks for the extension tube idea! That should take care of my macro needs (at least partially) for now...since I just realized if I go macro, there's other stuff needed/used to shoot macro (tripod and lighting wise).

Regarding the 70-4004L, the only thing I'm worried about is the additional money for a collar, which runs at a ridiculous price of $100 or something like that. Plus I don't do alot of long distance work with the 200mm end of what I have already.

Lester Wareham wrote in post #2105134
What you might want to consider if you get the 100mm macro (excellent lens) is the stratagy I used of pairing that with the very sharp 200 f2.8L rather than a tele zoom.

If you do want a tele zoom you should consider holding until you can aford the IS version of the 70-200 f4.

For the landscape stuff looking at the UW you have ammitted the EF-S 10-22, an excellent lens - is this because of cost?

What about the normal zoom range, ie the 17-40 f4L or will you stick with the kit lens for the moment (or do you not have that?).

For people you 50mm would be good and the 100mm macro would also work when you want longer reach.

Try and think about how you will develope your system over the next couple of years.

IIRC both the 200 2.8 and 70-200 f4 IS will be way over my budget...I'm 17 and I don't want to spend 1k on a single lense.

And yes, I did omit the EF-S 10-22 because of price reasons, as well as the 17-40L for price reasons.

Thanks for mentioning thinking of how I will develop my system over the next few years, I never really considered that before but I'll take it into consideration now

JimAskew wrote in post #2105393
JCW122,

I would consider the Canon EF 28-105MM EF MArk II for $229.00 at B=H. Go to this link: http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …SA&addedTroughT​ype=search

Then look at a WA prime...perhaps the Sigma 20MM f/1.4 or similar Canon WA.

The 28-105 Mark II is also a "MACRO" lens and takes great close ups. This is the lens I used to study various focal lenghts before I decided what lenses to add to my kit. I am giving this lens and one of my Rebel 350s to my daughter so she can learn as I did. It is not the fastest lens (f/3.5 to f/4.5) but you can crank up the ISO in low light situations.

Godd luck on your selections,

Just not interested in anything with a not-as-large aperature like that.

Get the Tamron 17-50 2.8. This will take care of landscape and portraits and provide a good walk around lens. Then get the 70-200L when you can afford it.

Stan43 wrote in post #2105451
Get the Tamron 17-50 2.8. This will take care of landscape and portraits and provide a good walk around lens. Then get the 70-200L when you can afford it.

What do you think about the idea of getting the Tamron 28-75 2.8? Then getting a UWA and 70-2004L in the future after that?

(I'm off to school, so I won't be replying back as quick til this afternoon)

jcw122 wrote in post #2105428
Just not interested in anything with a not-as-large aperature like that.

jcw122,

There is a dicodomy in lens purchases that I have found with, sometimes painful, experience:

Cost <-> IQ <-> f/stop

You can have any two at the expense of the third. So if you want IQ and lower cost then you must give on f/stop. Or, if you want IQ and fast f/stop then you can expect to pay a lot more, etc.

So, as you make your decisions you will find yourself always making tradeoffs.

A 4th factor is time...you can beat cost by saving over time and then getting the IQ & f/stop you want when you have the cash on hand

Again, good luck on your decisons and enjoy your photography...I sure do