Some last minute decisions now, come help.

Well I leave for Italy for 2 weeks in a month. I've gone through just about the entire EOS line up. I've ended up with what I need, and what I want, not my lust for gear. The 30D, the 10-22, and the Sigma 30. I have a feeling I'm going to want to bring at least one other lens with me, maybe a standard zoom or something. I don't want to shell out a ton of money, but the lens' of choice is mainly going to be for the trip to Italy. You guys have done just about everything for me, so I ask for one last cry for help. Given the gear in the sig, knowing you were going to Rome, Capri, Venice, Naples, Florence, and Tuscany, what is the one lens you'd want to add to your arsenal?

Well seeing as I am also off to Italy in a few weeks, I will certainly not be leaving my 24-105 F4L behind.

Becareful in Naples, I hear it can be a little dodgy in some areas.

Have fun!

It depends on your style. I am in Maui right now (leaving shortly) and for the entire week used only the Tamron 1750f2.8 and Sigma 30f1.4. I found no use for my 70-200 f4 IS; didn't mount it once. I have been to Italy though, and I would recommend you bring your UWA. But I do think it's nice to have a standard zoom for your trip, something like the 1755IS, 1750Di-II, 1850EX, 1770DC, etc. So I'd say add a standard zoom, and also, if your style requires, something like a telezoom such as the 70-300IS --- a great travel tele.

august23 wrote in post #3156300
Well I leave for Italy for 2 weeks in a month. I've gone through just about the entire EOS line up. I've ended up with what I need, and what I want, not my lust for gear. The 30D, the 10-22, and the Sigma 30. I have a feeling I'm going to want to bring at least one other lens with me, maybe a standard zoom or something. I don't want to shell out a ton of money, but the lens' of choice is mainly going to be for the trip to Italy. You guys have done just about everything for me, so I ask for one last cry for help. Given the gear in the sig, knowing you were going to Rome, Capri, Venice, Naples, Florence, and Tuscany, what is the one lens you'd want to add to your arsenal?

For a cropped sensor camera body like the 30D, I would take a 24-70 or 24-105. Since you already have a 30mm and 10-22 you have the wide end covered. You may find a 70-200 also appealing also for those longer reach Italian "Hottie" shots. Good luck and have fun your trip.

Agent69 wrote in post #3156410
For a cropped sensor camera body like the 30D, I would take a 24-70 or 24-105. Since you already have a 30mm and 10-22 you have the wide end covered

Theoretically and on paper, it looks nice and good to have a 10-22 and a 24-105, but in practice, overlap is ideal and more useful like a 10-22 and 17-55 on a 1.6x. The 1755 will stay on the camera most of the time, and the UWA and fast prime can supplement it. But having a 10-22 and 24-105 will cause the OP to have to switch a million times, resulting in frustrating, in practice. But then again, YMMV.

I am planning my third trip to Italy. I have made up my mind that I will be taking the 10-22, 17-85 and will buy a 45 Tilt and Shift. Will need to have lot's of practice beforehand.

Take S17-70, it's a great lense. I used that last July in Italy most of time with 20D.

LightRules wrote in post #3156437
Theoretically and on paper, it looks nice and good to have a 10-22 and a 24-105, but in practice, overlap is ideal and more useful like a 10-22 and 17-55 on a 1.6x. The 1755 will stay on the camera most of the time, and the UWA and fast prime can supplement it. But having a 10-22 and 24-105 will cause the OP to have to switch a million times, resulting in frustrating, in practice. But then again, YMMV.

LOL , $1000 for a EF-S mount lens, I would rather spend the money on a 24-70 or 24-105 and not be restricted to a lens limited to APS-C cropped sensor cameras. Again, thats IMO. I've been through the EF-S lineup and it was painful when I later moved towards the 1D and 5D having to sell off lenses I couldn't use any more. I you want to avoid switching lenses, Canon does offer the 28-300L.

I'd say get a 17-50 or an 18-50. You won't have much need for telephoto.

LightRules wrote in post #3156437
But having a 10-22 and 24-105 will cause the OP to have to switch a million times, resulting in frustrating, in practice.

Couldn't agree more. Why not buy the lenses designed for a crop camera? The wide to short tele zooms in the L lens range were primarily designed for FF bodies like the 5D and 1Ds. While they can be used on crop cameras, the focal ranges start or stop at distances that make them less useful on such bodies.

While I agree that if one can afford a grand on an EF-S lens, it may make more sense to simply upgrade to a FF body, particularly if you already have many other EF mount lenses (which was my situation before getting the 5D), if the OP has no desire/need to go FF, then an investment in a good walkabout lens like the 17-55IS or a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 makes more sense. For vacation travel photography, less is always more.

August, I just have to ask, are you sure you actually want to go to Italy?

Not some where else, or perhaps spend the cash on a home cinema or somthing else like that?

Just pulling your chain - seriously, I think a 'standard' zoom is pretty much essential. the 17-55 is probably the way to go. Or the 17-70 if you are feeling more cost conscious ( and i like the extra reach more than I like the idea of IS on a walk about standard zoom anyway)

What happened to that 35 you 'accidentally' ordered from B&H?

Around and around we go....

Why not a standard zoom for a bit of reach? You've said in the past you're not a telephoto shooter so I wouldn't get a longish zoom. You said you don't want to spend alot of money, why not the Sigma 24-70 F/2.8 or Tamron 28-75 F/2.8? (pppsssttt, looking to sell my tammy)

Buddy pick up a used 70-200 f4 L for your trip. Who knows you might like it enough to keep it But it would be a good travel zoom I think because it is so light compared to all the rest, yet yields the same optics.

Seriously you bought another 30 f1.4 EX after you sold me yours? How long did it take to miss this fantastic glass?

Hi August,

I've been considerign what I woudl take myself in a case like that, trying to limit myself to relatively few lenses .

So, the first lenses that came to mind were an UWA, preferably zoom, as for its intended use large apertures wouldn't be a problem, and a large aperture approximately standard lens, for low light shots, so would be not a zoom.

You have covered both of those with the EF-S 10-22 and the Sigma 30 F/1.4. I would have chosen the same UWA zoom, and probably chosen one of the following: EF 28 F/1.8, EF 24 F/1.4 L, EF 35 F/1.4 L. Ok, I own the 28, so probably that one.

For another lens, or maybe two, it depends a bit on what you intend to shoot. If I would stay inside the cities all the time, my first next choice would be the 24-105 F/4 L IS. Great range for all kinds of details (landscape, architecture, markets, etc.) and portraits of all kind and fashion. And the IS adds that extra bit of portability in low light, provided your subjects are relatively still.

I would probably add the 70-200 F/$ L IS as a second lens, sorry, fourth lens, in that case, and bring the extender 1.4X II as well, just for those occasions where you need a little more reach.

Now, if I would actually spend a fair amount of time in the field, the 70-200 RF/4 L IS would be my third choice, because of the slightly compressed landscapes you can shoot with it, and for candid shots, and all kinds of details. The IS again helps in lower light and fairly still subjects.

And the 24-105 would be my fourth lens in that case. See above why.

Two weeks is a bit short, timewise, so I would suggest not to get more lenses than the two mentioned above, plus an extender if need be. I found the 70-200 needs little to no time to get used to, but the 24-105, and probably any lens in that range, does. So I would regard two weeks more or less as the minimum amount of time required to get and get used/test and exchange (if need be) a lens.

Anyway, those would be my choices.

I suddenly realize you don't want to spend a lot of money. Ah, well. In that case the EF 70-300 IS, or one of the EF-S 60 macro or the EF 85 F/1.8. The 60 macro or the 85 instead of the 24-105, and the 70-300 instead of the 70-200.

BTW, I wouldn't visit the Tuscany hills without a ~100 mm equivalent... It is a classic length for slightly compressed landscape shots in a hilly environment. If I really had to limit my choices to just 2 lenses, for Italy I would take a 20 to 24 mm (so the 10-22 zoom is perfect for this) and a 100 mm equivalent (60 macro). I could probably do 95 % of my shots with those two.

HTH, kind regards, Wim

I think a standard zoom is all you need. You got the UWA covered n the 30mm will come handy in low light. Dont see much use for a telephoto, you can always zoom in by taking a few steps forward. My best bet would be the EF-S 18-55, but if you plan on going FF and dont want to spend too much just go for the Tammy offered by Dorman (we'll talk about my cut through PM)