New lenses or new body?

I’ve seen the valuable advice that you experts out there regularly hand out to those seeking it, a lot of which revolve around such questions as ‘what lens should I buy’, so I’ve got a rather more involved query that I’m sure some of you can help me with. At the moment, I have a 30D with a 17-85mm kit lens (I also have a 75-300mm, but that’s irrelevant at the moment). I want to upgrade to an L-series lens and the one I have in mind is the 24-105mm. However, that would lose me the wide angle facility, so I’ve decided to add the Canon 10-22mm. This, I believe, would give me good coverage with two superb lenses.

But this is where the problem comes (as I’m visiting New York soon, I thought I’d pay a visit to B&H, so I’m using their prices). The price of the two lenses would be $1850. But it got me thinking that, if I bought a 5D and the 24-105, I wouldn’t necessarily need the 10-22 lens. The price of the 5D and the 24-105 would, however, be another $2000. This in turn, means that I could sell my 30D body (for, let’s say, $800). The net cost of the 5D and 24-105 would be about $3000, only $1150 more than the two lenses that I originally intended to buy.

So – the question is, would I be better off just buying the two lenses or, for another $1150, get the 5D and one lens? Obviously, it’s a lot of money but which route would give me better results or be better value for money? Over to you pundits!

I would just get the 24-105. It would save you a shed load of cash, and it's all you would have with 5d combo anyway. You could decide if you still need the 10-22 later.

Get the lenses, the 30D is a fine body. After you expand your lens colloection get the best body you can afford at that time.

Thanks to both of you for your advice - I think I take your advice and just get the lenses. By the way, cgratti, are you pleased with your 70-200 f4 - and do you miss IS?

I wish I waited and bought the 70-200 f/4 IS. Ive used the 2.8 IS version and wish the 70-200 f/4 came with IS. So i bought the lens, and few months later the IS f/4 version came out!!!!!

Sigh

haha... oo ya, and to answer the OPs question, I alway go for new glass over a new body.

Glass = Investment
Camera = tool that looses value.

Ive been wanting to buy a 30D, 5D, or waiting for the 40D as a backup/upgrade to my 20D ... but the way canon keep poping out new models, and they ammount of $ depreication that I see on the bodies, helps me be a lot more paitent. The only time I would encourage an upgrade of a body is if someone had a Rebel.

Does that mean that you found the lens difficult to hold steady?

Lenses , body's come out every year. You can have a second or third generation camera and still take good fantastic pictures with the right lenses.

That's very interesting - your remark about a lens is an investment and a body is a tool that loses money. I've never thought of it that way, but I think you're right.

Well a good body goes a long way, but yes the lenses are the investment...

I can't tell you how many pro's are still shooting with a rebel or a 10D, they got lenses they got years ago that were top notch , and they are still amazing.

I'm glad I started this thread - I've got a lot of really useful information from you guys. But why are you all from North America - aren't there any Brits with opinions? (Perhaps it's the wrong time of day over here!)

get the lenses! the 30D is a fine body.

Keep the 30D. Sell the 17-85mm, use the proceeds towards the 10-22mm, and add the 24-105mm. You'll then have an effective 16-168mm of coverage and all of it with excellent glass and only a 2mm gap.

cdi-ink.com wrote in post #2408950
Keep the 30D. Sell the 17-85mm, use the proceeds towards the 10-22mm, and add the 24-105mm. You'll then have an effective 16-168mm of coverage and all of it with excellent glass and only a 2mm gap.

Thanks for that. I think that's what I really wanted to do - your comments have persuaded me. I think I'll add either the 70-200 f4L or the new(ish) 70-300 f4.5. What do you think?

Roy Mathers wrote in post #2408989
Thanks for that. I think that's what I really wanted to do - your comments have persuaded me. I think I'll add either the 70-200 f4L or the new(ish) 70-300 f4.5. What do you think?

definitly a good move aswell. the 70-200 L is a better lens IMO.