Which 2 lenses would you start with? Canon 30D

Thanks greg250 .

I got 30D about 3 month and love the camera ,so far my best lens is 24-105 .

17-40 F4L and 70-200 F2.8L

Why? because that's what a pro photographer told me to get

You can do some research here : http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/

greg250 wrote in post #3487650
it depends on what you are shooting

danpass wrote in post #3487661
I guess it will depend on budget,

If these two are not known you can not get a true answer. All you can get is a guess and the lens that each responder likes best. What you are wanting to shoot will probably vary quite a bit. But if you don't have rough idea of what you want to spend you'll get answers from the 50 1.8 ($50-$70 used) up to the 70-200 f2.8 IS ($1600 new).

I'll go against the grain slightly here and suggest you start with the budget lenses - no frills - no bells and whistles or rave reviews.

The best way to appreciate "good glass" is by experimenting with the "not-so-good" glass first.

Learn the little quirks of the cheap stuff then spoil yourself with the quality and superiority of reputable lenses i.e., L Glass. You'll have a far greater appreciation for - ... - spending money!

greg250,

You have not given us much info on the kinds of shooting you like to do. But I will only share my experience, for what it's worth:

My wife and I have a pile of lenses, but my two favorites are the Tamron 17-50 and the Sigma 70-200. I could be pretty happy with just these two. The gap between 50 and 70mm doesn't really bother me as I can usually either zoom with my feet or crop to get the composition I want.

They are both relatively fast (f/2.8 ), with very nice optics. They are both priced much more reasonable than the Canon offerings in a similar focal length range. Many will argue whether or not Canon "L" glass is worth the extra dollars. But I think these two offer very nice value for the hobbyist or part-timer.

I would agree with SAMNZ. Furthermore, I would suggest the kit lens first since in goes down to 18mm which you need for wide angle (scenery/landscapes). Some of the lenses suggested above will leave you with no wide angle capability (and bankrupt too). Don't buy an expensive L lens unless you know which one you really want. You'll find some excellent photos taken with the kit lens on this forum. I've seen some lousy photos taken with L lenses. Don't be over impressed by the letter 'L'.

I saw the Canon 30D recently being offered with the 28-135 mm as a kit lens instead of the 18-55mm. Is that what you have? Or do you have the 18-55?

danpass wrote in post #3487661
No kit lens with that 30D?

I guess it will depend on budget, how about a 24-70L, about US$1000? And a 70-200 2.8 IS (about US$1500)

Otherwise go here https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=141406

Without a concern for cost, I would also recommend the above. I know I like mine.

For mid-range lenses, I'd go for the 50mm 1.4 and maybe a 70-200 f2.8L (non-IS).

I myself just purchased a 30D and got the 50mm 1.4. Down the track, I'm going to get a telephoto zoom, likely the 70-200 f2.8L.

depending on your budget i would go 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8

I'm taking a basic photography course right now and switch between the kit lens and the 50mm 1.8. For the assignments, these ones are perfect. My advice is to resist the urge to spend wads of cash on lenses until you know what kind of photography you want to focus on. imho

I do plan on getting my first L lens this year.

i'd say 17-55mm f2.8IS + 70-200mm f4L IS

I started with the 24-105 & 70-200 f/2.8 IS and then realized that 24mm isn't wide enough on a crop body, so added the 10-22 (and later sold it and bought the 16-35). If you go the 24-xx & 70-200 route, make sure you keep the kit lens for the 18+ focal lengths.

17-55IS and 60/2.8Macro

Then add a 28/1.8 and 70-200L or 135/2L and you're set =)