Best Combination for $1000

I would like to spend 1000 dollars on the new gear and need your help to choose the best combination.

I use Rebel Xti(400D) and have 50mm 1.8 currently.

99% I shoot my family pictures indoor and outdoor. So, it is basically Portraits/group pictures and Landscapes.

These options i have shortlisted after going though the forum 6 hrs a day for the last 20 days

Thanks

Hmm.. quite a range of ranges though I’m leaning towards option #2, followed by #1, then #3, and lastly #4.

I’m basing this on the fact that you do not now own a external flash and from the first two choices lt looks like your trying to get some distance as well.

#2 seems the best for me

#1 is kinda pointless IMHO...i.e, 17-50 AND 18-200... why not just get teh 18-200... ur not missing much.

also.. have you considered the Sigma 17-70 2.8 and Canon 70-200 f4L
.... save up a little more and then get the 430EX

doesn't sigma make a 70-200 2.8 for like $600.. you could do that and get the sigma 17-70.. at least you'll have fast glass without breaking the bank..

sigma 17-70 and sigma 70-200

Tamron 17-50 + Canon55-250 IS + 430 EX - ~ $950

bigbaby987 wrote in post #5440838
doesn't sigma make a 70-200 2.8 for like $600.. you could do that and get the sigma 17-70.. at least you'll have fast glass without breaking the bank..

it's more like 750-800

http://www.amazon.com …ics&qid=1209661​690&sr=8-1

I bought the Tamron 17-50 and the Canon 70-300 IS for not much over $1000. If that was on the poll, I'd vote for that. The other super zooms will not have very good IQ. The 70-300 IS will beat them soundly.

best combo for $1000?

17-55 + UV filter !

ed rader

bigbaby987 wrote in post #5440838
doesn't sigma make a 70-200 2.8 for like $600.. you could do that and get the sigma 17-70.. at least you'll have fast glass without breaking the bank..

sigma 17-70 and sigma 70-200

Sigma 17-70 is better than Tamron 17-50?

maybe look at a couple primes and a flash, that would work really nice.

50 1.4 (325) and a 430ex (244) and maybe add 85 1.8 (355) for a little but more range.

From what you wrote it doesn't sound like your shooting everyday. These would give better quality (primes vs. zooms) pictures without breaking the bank.

If it were me though i would go for the 24-105 or the 24-70. Ever since my first piece of L glass i have been a proponent of them at every turn.

Tammy 28-75 f/2.8 or 17-50 f/2.8 + Canon 70-200f/4L

sgogula wrote in post #5440975
Sigma 17-70 is better than Tamron 17-50?

Sigma 17-70
https://photography-on-the.net …589&highlight=S​igma+17-70

Tamron 17-50
https://photography-on-the.net …light=Tamron+17​-50&page=4

both are great.... the Sigma will give more range

sgogula wrote in post #5440975
Sigma 17-70 is better than Tamron 17-50?

naw. the siggie is a glorified kit lens. the tamron is constant f2.8 and your best bet if you can't/won't pop for the 17-55 IS.

ed rader

holrd wrote in post #5440982
maybe look at a couple primes and a flash, that would work really nice.

50 1.4 (325) and a 430ex (244) and maybe add 85 1.8 (355) for a little but more range.

From what you wrote it doesn't sound like your shooting everyday. These would give better quality (primes vs. zooms) pictures without breaking the bank.

If it were me though i would go for the 24-105 or the 24-70. Ever since my first piece of L glass i have been a proponent of them at every turn.

you are correct, I dont shoot everyday..Problem with the primes is I can't take group pictures standing closely also I need one lens which takes all types of pictures when I am on vacation.

I was also leaning towards 24-105L initially but thinking is it wide enough for a crop body.

Aww geez, why is the L winning this poll? 2 decent lenses plus a good flash vs. one limited L lens? On an XTi? No thanks.
See my sig for my vote.