Helping a newbie with lens choice...

Hey guys I am very confused, do not know what to buy and I need your help really bad...

I have a Canon 30D with the kit lens and the 580EX flash and I would like to buy some lenses. I am NOT a professional and I do not have any plans to become one, I need the lenses mostly for my travel (40%), baby (40%) and wildlife (20%). We are going to Galapagos next year and I would like to have enough time to play with the lenses...

I have been checking some reviews and I made this list with some options... My main concern is changing lenses while outside and the weight but again, I am not an expert and I would like to have your advice... I had included a prime to use it in low light and baby's portraits.

Price... Well is always a concern and that is why I do not like very much Option No. 1 but, I want to buy the best I can so I do not have to buy anything else anymore... The number next to the price is the total weight in grams...

Option No. 1 (US 3427.00) (2930 g)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Standard AutoFocus
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM AutoFocus
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Image Stabilizer AutoFocus
Canon Extender EF 1.4x
Cons: Price, not enough zoom for wildlife, total weight.

Option No. 2 (US 2780.00) (2340 g)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Standard AutoFocus
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM AutoFocus
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L USM AutoFocus Image Stabilized

Option No. 3 (US 2890.00) (2755 g)
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM AutoFocus
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM AutoFocus
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L USM AutoFocus Image Stabilized

Option No. 4 (US 2600.00) (1960 g)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Standard AutoFocus
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM AutoFocus
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM Autofocus
Cons: Not very good reviews for 70-300 lens and if more zoom is need it can't use extender

Option No. 5 (US 2500.00) (1960 g)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Standard AutoFocus
Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM AutoFocus
Cons: Can't use extender, weight of 28-300 lens


Please help me to choose the perfect combination, if you have a better combination please let me know....

Thanks a lot

For travel, I really think you are going to want wider than 24-28mm. I just got back from a 3 week vacation and 80% of my shots were taken at 20mm and under. If it were me, and I was looking at mid-$2000, I'd get the following

Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS
Canon 70-200 f/4 IS
Canon 1.4x TC
Canon 430ex flash

Total $2597 (prices from B&H)

You will find that the 17-55 is an amazingly versatile lens. It's wide enough for travel, and long enough for portraits. It's got a wide aperature (f/2.8 ) and and 3 stop IS. If you feel that this is not good enough for low light, add in the 50mm/85mm prime.

For the tele end, the 70-200 is a great lens. With the 1.4x TC you will have a 95-280mm f/5.6. You will also find that this lens is small/light and suitable for travel. You can substitue the 100-400 for this lens, but it's bigger/heavier, and not something I would want to lug around while traveling.

This package focuses on quality, and not quantity. My own preference is to keep my lens kit as small as possible, and not add a bunch of lenses that rarely get used. I'd rather have a couple of lenses that I know inside and out, rather than a lot of lenses that I know little about.

+ 1 for BigBlueDodge's reply, for the first bit.

Next, I would consider a nifty fifty (50 F/1.8), or a 50 F/1.4, and a 85 F/1.8 for baby's portraits, which means you're prepared for when the baby grows up, or for portraits of other people.

So, you would end up with:
EF-S 17-55 F/2.8 IS
EF 70-200 F/4 L IS
Extender 1.4x II
EF 50 F/1.8 or EF 50 F/1.4
EF 85 F/1.8 (later)

If you do think that wildlife is very, very important, and you need that little extra, I would suggest to go for the 100-400 F/4.5 - F/5.6 L IS, instead of the 70-200 F/4 L IS and extender, but do get the 85 F/1.8 now, rather than later. You won't miss the 56-84 bit, I would think, and you certainly won't miss the 86 to 99 part.

Kind regards, Wim

I agree with BigBlueDodge's setup although I don't know why he included the 430EX since the OP already has a 580. I would also favor the 70-200mm f/2.8 over the f/4 IS but I'm just partial to speed over IS, either way works.

For a trip to the Galapagos, I think you HAVE to have the 100-400 in there. I also agree that you don't have anything wide, unless you plan to fall back on the kit lens for that.

doh! I just re-read the OP and saw that he had a 580 already. In that case, strike the 430ex.

for a crop camera i think you would be better off with something wider than 24-70 as well, so i will go with this setup which is very similar to those mentioned above:

EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS
EF 70-200 f/4L IS (or f/2.8 non-IS)
EF 50 f/1.4
1.4x TC

Yep...

17-55
70-200 f4IS
1.4x TC

Definitely a great balance of performance and weight.

Man, carrying the brick and the 70-200 f2.8 IS or 100-400 would be a back breaker for me!

I feel the need to rock the boat just a little bit.

I had the 70-200 f/4 and it is a teriffic lens but I didn't want to carry it around while traveling...too heavy for long trips, especially when traveling with a family and all the stuff that goes with it. I like to keep my travel kit to two lens. Thus I carry the 17-55 IS, on my camera 80% of the time, and the 70-300 IS. I find the 70-300 IS the perfect companion as like the 17-55 IS its image quality is suprising. It is also very light and provides me all the range I need out to 300mm. Many call this a hidden L and I must agree. In my opinion comapring it to the 70-200 f/4 with the TC only a pixel peeper could tell the difference. Plus I didn't like having on the 70-200 f/4 and then realizing I had to add the TC to get the reach I wanted.

So what I would recommend is...

- 17-55 IS
- 70-300 IS

So, that is my opinion, but when traveling I really don't want more than two lenses, three tops. I don't even take a flash with me. I find that having to worry about which lens to pop on to get a shot, I would rather think about the shot then my lens choice. I agree with BigBlueDoge, keep it simple.

Good luck.

I'm going to say the Canon EFS 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and the Sigma AF 50-150mm f/2.8 + 1.4x T-con.

When travelling you'll find that your main lens will always be your widest lens, unless you're out on safari... If you feel you need the extra reach you have the T-con and if not you have a fast tele which can be used as your portrait lens too.

$1868.00 from BH Photo for the 2 lenses and T-con (another $200 if you want to add in a 2x T-con as well)

While out and about travelling light is a very important matter.

My only concern with the four choices is that you don't have anything wider than 24mm. Option #5 gives me pause due to the mass of the 28-300 L lens.

The 70-300 f4.5-5.6 DO is a far better lens than many of the reviews would indicate. Yes there are some specific situations where the unique optics of this lens do have a somewhat adverse affect on Image Quality, however these are not normal situations. I do own one of these lenses and find that it serves me very well, but you might not take the same type of photos that I do.

All things considered If I were limited to the four choices listed I would probably chose option #2. It gives you IS over the range of focal lengths, however I would also look at buying a wider lens in the near future.

WMS

I'm going to suggest another option, based on your experience, intentions and future plans. You say you do not intend to ever take up photography seriously, but want to record your child's moments and travel highlights.

In my opinion, although the above lists make for an excellent kit, you will be wasting your money.

A 50mm 1.4 will more then likely cause you more problems then it will fix, in particular, if you are not seriously going to play with DoF - and if not using 1.4, then why spend the money?

This is what I would suggest, based on best-value/suitability:

1/ - Tamron 17-50mm 2.8
Is very nice and sharp, constant aperture of 2.8 so is handy in lower light situations, including indoor portraits. Good build, not too heavy or long. Very cost-effective for holiday shots in small towns, landscapes, and portraits.

2/ - Canon 70-300mm IS USM
Will cover the rest of your range. 300mm will get you close enough to most wildlife you could expect to see. The IS feature will definately work well, since I doubt you'll be walking around with a tri/mono pod. Comes close enough to 'L' quality with regards to IQ. Build is not anywhere as good as L lens, but more then good enough. A 70-200mm L is of course great - but I would choose the extra 100mm in your situation.

The gap between the two lens is not great enough to caue any concern. The Tamron is for cropped frame bodies only, like your own - and you won't be upgrading to full-frame anytime in the near future, by the sounds of it.

These two lens will get you everything you need, for a fraction of the cost. With the $1500 or so you save, I would invest in a portable storage solution - maybe a 120gb Epson. This will be invaluable to you - download your pics, wipe your card, and off you go. A 4gb flash card will also be handy.