What lens do you recommend?

I want to get a new lens that will deliver a good quality image.

The things I tend to photograph are portraits in a studio, portraits out on location including outside, the occasional wedding, event type things that are usually indoors, and the occasional sports/fact action stuff such as baseball, ballet on stage, etc.

I did previously rent the Canon EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS lens, I didnt notice a difference in image quality with IS, and found it to be pretty heavy, but the heavyness I will probably have to get over.

My current camera's are Canon XT and 20D. I plan on buying the 550D/T2I pretty soon for an up coming wedding *handles noise better than my current gear* and down the road I will buy a 5DMII or what ever the current model is. Becuase of the full frame camera in my future I want to stay away from EF-S lenses.

The lenses I currently have are 50mm F1.8, 85mm F1.8, 75-300mm and the kit lens, 17-55mm.

I try to use the primes the most, but I find 50mm on a 1.6x crop body gets me to close and I have to use the kit lens here and there, so I think Ill stick with a wide angle zoom for my next lens.

Becuaes of the indoor photography including weddings, I want it to be fast. But im also not loaded with money so it cant be the best lens Canon makes. I am open to get a non canon lens.

* I was thinking of the EF 17-40 F/4L which is about $700 but I think F4 will be to slow.
* There is the EF 24-70 F/2.8L that is about $1200 but im concerned that the 24mm is not wide enough for some indoor locations. I can only move back so far. But I also dont want unflattering distortions of going to wide.
* So I am thinking about the EF 16-35 F/2.8L II that is around - $1500. I think it would replace my kit lens nicely, even get a slightly bit more wide. I dont like the price but its an investment.
* There is this one, the EF-S 10-22 F/3.5-4.5 that is about $700 but its EF-S and 22mm might be to wide for most of my shots. Although the 10mm would be sweet for car pictures and seniors.

I dont know much about tamron and other non canon lenses, so I was hoping I could get some feedback from the pro's here.

IF I am understanding correctly you are asking for one lens which will be a capable performer for Portraits (both indoors and out), weddings and other similar events, as will as sports. I regret to say that there isn't such a lens to the best of my knowledge. a 70-200 f2.8 would come close but it would be a little long for portraits in enclosed places and a bit short for sports. Something like the Tamron 17-270 would cover the range of focal lengths needed, but it isn't fast enough for sports in the dark or for indoor events without a lot of flash (now it it was a constant f2.8....).

As for not wanting to go too wide and getting unwanted distortions, all 24 mm wide angle lenses are 24 mm wide lenses whether they are zoom or prime (and yes there are actual differences in any two lenses but there are more similarities than differences at a given length).

This is why many of those who list what lenses they have list so many, they have different lenses for different situations.

Wayne

I realize that lenses normally used for sports are telephoto, but there are occasions that a wide angle lens can come in handy. I think I may get the 100-400mm lens eventually for sports, which is a bit on the slow side, but can be compensated for.

By distortion I know that 24mm on one lens gives you teh same distortion as 24mm on another, or close to it. I meant I was wondering how wide I can go before the distortion renders the shot not to useable, especially with weddings. But It would be good to have something that can go really wide for the shot of everyone at the altar.

I know idealy I want to use 50mm for a portrait or longer, but that doesnt always work in doors at an event.

It would be nice if they made a 16-85mm F1.8 but as far as I know, they dont.

So I am leaning towards the Canon 16-35, but wish the 35 was a 50. I dont expect to need the 16 range to often. I will be using a 2nd body during a wedding as backup and to have a lens that I can use here and there with out having to switch lenses during the ceremony, but right now I dont like the noise levels of my two current cameras so I will be trying to avoid using the backup as much as I can.

Canon does make an EF-s 15-85 however I do not have any experience with it but I don't think that it is particularly fast (@f3.5-5.6).

Wayne

I think theres something like ef-s 17-135 to, but its also not fast, and its ef-s.

Depending on when you plan on upgrading to a full frame camera, you might want to exclude any EF-S lenses from your list, as they are not compatible with full frame. You can always upgrade later, but its going to cost you extra in the end. I LOVE my EF-S 17-55 2.8, but its not compatible with my recently purchased 5DII and it collects a crazy amount of dust inside the elements (even with a filter). I won't be using my copy again until I send it for a good cleaning. I've been shooting indoor concerts for the past few years and will no longer consider buying anything slower than f/2.8. My 17-55mm f/2.8 was my main lens. I've replaced that with a 16-35mm f/2.8, because I love to shoot wide angles. But it probably has too much distortion for your tastes. It sounds to me that the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L is probably best suited for your needs.. it will give you the best range for your needs, the best image quality and you won't have to buy twice (because you bought the best lens) when you upgrade cameras.

Christal

But is 24mm on a 1.6x crop body to close for getting all the brides maides, the couple and grooms men in one shot? Not every church has a balcony so something wide is useful from the ground floor. I wish the 7d was a full frame body, I would just go for that and not worry that the lens was only 24mm.

I guess I should just google up some full res images that was created with the 24-70 and the 16-35 lenses and see what I think.

I think theres a current canon instant rebate going on this week until the 10th, where you save $100. this might force me to buy the lens 1.5 months earlier than I was thinking.

The 16-35mm is VERY wide (on a full frame) and creates a LOT of distortion on the edges. Probably not good in a wedding setting unless it is for an "alternative" style wedding. Should be good on a crop, though. The 16-35 also doesn't have as much angle of view range as the 24-70. 24mm should be plenty wide enough on a crop, unless you are standing 2 ft from the wedding party, which they probably wouldn't want you to anyways. Only you can decide what's best for you, really. If you can, go to your nearest camera store and ask to try them both out. Or the closest to a 24mm. Honestly, I would steer clear of anything slower than a constant 2.8. Last thing you want to be doing at a wedding is fiddling with your shutter and aperture every time you zoom in or out.

msfvirginia wrote in post #10488225
But is 24mm on a 1.6x crop body to close for getting all the brides maides, the couple and grooms men in one shot? Not every church has a balcony so something wide is useful from the ground floor. I wish the 7d was a full frame body, I would just go for that and not worry that the lens was only 24mm.

I guess I should just google up some full res images that was created with the 24-70 and the 16-35 lenses and see what I think.

I think theres a current canon instant rebate going on this week until the 10th, where you save $100. this might force me to buy the lens 1.5 months earlier than I was thinking.

For the 16-35;

http://www.pixel-peeper.com …n=none&exp_max=​none&res=3

for the 24-70

http://www.pixel-peeper.com …n=none&exp_max=​none&res=3

Both with the Canon 20D camera specified.

Wayne

Thanks for the links, going to check the sample images out!

the sample images didnt really show wedding pics at teh alter, which is what I care about. I guess Ill have to use my kit lens and see what 24mm looks like in the Churches I normally take pictures at and see how that does.

I was about to pull the trigger, and I noticed sigma makes a 24-70 F2.8 lens as well, for $500 less, and nother one for another hundred dollars cheaper.

Does anyone know anything about that lens? Is it worth the savings? Im gonig to look for some reviews, but was hoping someone here has tried both the sigma and canon and can give advice.

I pulled the trigger, I got the 24-70 after all.

I do wish it was a bit wider, but now to find a replacement for the wider version. I just found the tokina 11-16 F2.8 for $600, never heard of that brand but it has good reviews on bhphotovideo.com. Time to research that one.