so, this weekend I'm ordering my Nifty Fifty 50mm f1.8, camera bag, another memory card (4GB) and maybe the Canon 430 flash kit with flash bracket and coil cord.

I'll have about $500 to play with in June/July for moar glass...

the 3 zoom lens that I have right now I'm not to thrilled with... they are the Canon 75-300mm f4-5.6 III, an old school 100-300mm f5.6 and a Kenko 420-800mm f8.3-16... so I'd like something.....better

help me decide please

well, the 50 is always a good start. What do you need the flash for? What are you intending on shooting? Why are you limited by the lenses you currently have?

I'll just go ahead and suggest it since everyone knows I'm going to anyways...

Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4, $390, it's awesome.

^

get Scott's sigma, sell the 3 lenses you listed and get the 75-300 IS.

I've never even heard of a Kenko 420-800 f/8.3 to 16 but that sounds horrible. I am sure focusing with that is a real pain.

You want something better? What kind of better do you need? Are you looking for a better lens to replace any of those three lenses you mentioned? For the 420-800 range you definitely won't find any good options anywhere remotely near $500.

The 75-300 and 100-300 are rather redundant. Do you even use the 420-800? I would look at what you have and figure out what you're using most first. I'd likely suggest selling one of the 75-300 or 100-300 lenses since I can't see how you'd need both and go from there.

If it were me, I'd go with Scott's favorite, the 17-70. It's a nice range, and I'd bet it's better than the kit lens you use now. Especially if you are getting a flash/bracket. I recently moved from a 18-55 to a 18-70, and I really like it. I was looking at the 17-70 HSM, but Nikon makes an equivalent, and it was cheaper.

I was never happy with any of the budget telephotos. I saved a bit more money, and got a constant 2.8 aperture, and it's worlds nicer than the slow 70-300 variable aperture range.

man...where do I start

Originally Posted by subimatt

well, the 50 is always a good start. What do you need the flash for? What are you intending on shooting? Why are you limited by the lenses you currently have?

well...

- flash - Practice with different light situations, portraits, headshots, etc...
- other lenses - I don't own them... they are on loan from my wifes sister in law.. plus I'm not happy with the AF speed

Originally Posted by Stime187

I'll just go ahead and suggest it since everyone knows I'm going to anyways...

Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4, $390, it's awesome.

I looked at this.. I like the range and I definately would like having the 2.8 rather than the 3.5 I have now

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

get Scott's sigma, sell the 3 lenses you listed and get the 75-300 IS.

can't sell.. I don't own them

Originally Posted by emorphien

I've never even heard of a Kenko 420-800 f/8.3 to 16 but that sounds horrible. I am sure focusing with that is a real pain.

HUGE understatement... I NEVER use it... major PITA

You want something better? What kind of better do you need? Are you looking for a better lens to replace any of those three lenses you mentioned? For the 420-800 range you definitely won't find any good options anywhere remotely near $500.

not neccessarily a high zoom factor... I wouldn't mind something in the 150 range

The 75-300 and 100-300 are rather redundant. Do you even use the 420-800? I would look at what you have and figure out what you're using most first. I'd likely suggest selling one of the 75-300 or 100-300 lenses since I can't see how you'd need both and go from there.

again... I can't sell ANY of them... they aren't mine... and after using both of them...I wouldnt buy one either

Originally Posted by LateApex

If it were me, I'd go with Scott's favorite, the 17-70. It's a nice range, and I'd bet it's better than the kit lens you use now. Especially if you are getting a flash/bracket. I recently moved from a 18-55 to a 18-70, and I really like it. I was looking at the 17-70 HSM, but Nikon makes an equivalent, and it was cheaper.

I was never happy with any of the budget telephotos. I saved a bit more money, and got a constant 2.8 aperture, and it's worlds nicer than the slow 70-300 variable aperture range.

I'm really happy with the Kit Lens IMHO... I learn more and more everytime I shoot on how I can use it differently.

the 420-800 "budget tele lens" is FTL!!! I got it with the camera for christmas... shot pics of the moon and put it up to collect dust...

That helps explain things a bit more.

What lens(es) do you have now and how are you using them mostly? Where do you find your current lens(es) lacking? Do you need something longer or wider? Or faster? That's how I would start in your position. You certainly have options available to you for example if you want a good telephoto zoom that zooms from a short tele to moderate tele range Canon does have the 70-200 series of lenses, the least expensive being the 4L. I wouldn't advise dumping that kind of money on a single lens unless you really know what it is you're after.

can you see how we'd be confused:

Originally Posted by beezwax

the 3 zoom lens that I have right now I'm not to thrilled with...

I'd probably grin an bear the kit lens and either go with a UWA zoom or tele zoom depending on what you shoot. If you don't need more zoom or more wide angle then maybe upgrade the kit lens.

What FLs are you shooting with the most now.

Originally Posted by beezwax

I'm really happy with the Kit Lens IMHO... I learn more and more everytime I shoot on how I can use it differently.

Wait, so you have the kit lens????

Nevermind about the 17-70, you don't need it. The lens you have is fine.

Upgrade to the kit would be the 28-135 IS. or the 28-105. Those would cover the ideal portrait and headshot lengths. Oh and adding a flash to the game is a whole different element. I would play with the stock flash for a bit before dropping $$ on a 430.

sorry guys.... the 420-800 and the kit lens are the only lenses that I own..

Originally Posted by emorphien

That helps explain things a bit more.

What lens(es) do you have now and how are you using them mostly? Where do you find your current lens(es) lacking? Do you need something longer or wider? Or faster? That's how I would start in your position. You certainly have options available to you for example if you want a good telephoto zoom that zooms from a short tele to moderate tele range Canon does have the 70-200 series of lenses, the least expensive being the 4L. I wouldn't advise dumping that kind of money on a single lens unless you really know what it is you're after.

I thought about the 70-200L, but then I look at Ben who just sold his and got the 135L IS and I'm like.... Hmmmmm... what about 105

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

can you see how we'd be confused:

I'd probably grin an bear the kit lens and either go with a UWA zoom or tele zoom depending on what you shoot. If you don't need more zoom or more wide angle then maybe upgrade the kit lens.

What FLs are you shooting with the most now.

I'm certainly keeping the kit lens... I'm confortable with it and am learning how to use it and what it's limitations are more and more...

what is UWA?

and IMHO, I'm not sure what my focal lengths are, or more exact... there is no consistantcy to it... I shoot everything I possibly can. From inches to yards away.... I suppose...if I had to pin point the most, it would be somewhere around 4-6 feet mark... did I answer that correctly?

Originally Posted by subimatt

Upgrade to the kit would be the 28-135 IS. or the 28-105. Those would cover the ideal portrait and headshot lengths. Oh and adding a flash to the game is a whole different element. I would play with the stock flash for a bit before dropping $$ on a 430.

ok... not getting a flash... leaves more $$$ for Glass

Originally Posted by beezwax

I thought about the 70-200L, but then I look at Ben who just sold his and got the 135L IS and I'm like.... Hmmmmm... what about 105

135 no IS, and don't go by what I do...
I'm weird with my glass choices.

what is UWA?

ultra wide angle. For you that's something in the 10mm range to the 20 something range, so the sigma 10-20 or canon 10-22... but:

[/QUOTE]there is no consistantcy to it... I shoot everything I possibly can.[/QUOTE]

OK, I'd suggest you hold off a bit longer. You need to settle into a shooting style for what and how you shoot. Once you've settled into a routine then you'll know which end you use more and what's holding you back. If you're always at 18mm then a 10-2x would be smart. If you're always at 55 then a tele zoom would be the next logical option.

For me I'd always go with a UWA zoom as my second lens after the kit. But looking at someone like matt, he'd get something longer I bet. We shoot differently so we use different lenses. Not better, just different.

Figure out what you like to shoot and how you like to shoot it and then buy a lens accordingly.

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

135 no IS, and don't go by what I do...
I'm weird with my glass choices.



ultra wide angle. For you that's something in the 10mm range to the 20 something range, so the sigma 10-20 or canon 10-22... but:
OK, I'd suggest you hold off a bit longer. You need to settle into a shooting style for what and how you shoot. Once you've settled into a routine then you'll know which end you use more and what's holding you back. If you're always at 18mm then a 10-2x would be smart. If you're always at 55 then a tele zoom would be the next logical option.

For me I'd always go with a UWA zoom as my second lens after the kit. But looking at someone like matt, he'd get something longer I bet. We shoot differently so we use different lenses. Not better, just different.

Figure out what you like to shoot and how you like to shoot it and then buy a lens accordingly.

i hear you... I'm pretty darn sure that 18 is plenty wide for me....or at least I say I need something wider... I do tend to find myself more towards the 55mm range come to think of it. sorry #1, sometimes I need a little time to snap into it

I like the idea of having the 28-105... A great deal just fell into my lap from a member... so I think I'll be getting the 105 and the 50 together...

still need to get the bag and memory card(s)....

no flash... I'll take the suggestion and hold off


thanks guys...you're the best

50s a given. the 28--105 seems like a good addition to what you have. You'll have almost twice the range with that.
I know Matt uses one and likes it a lot.

Originally Posted by beezwax

I thought about the 70-200L, but then I look at Ben who just sold his and got the 135L IS and I'm like.... Hmmmmm... what about 105

105 what?

Ben has a lot more experience with that kind of lens so what he did may be right for him may not be right for you. You don't have a lot of experience yet and I think there's still value in having a versatile lens that can zoom across a usable range. Do you not need anything past 105? Do you know you don't need anything past 105? How about anything shorter?

Years past it used to be people who were getting in to photography would have a couple primes but zooms being what they are today, I think a novice photographer can get more mileage out of decent coverage of the most used focal range from a couple zooms. That range is 20ish to 200ish for a lot of people in my opinion and my experience of observing others in your position.

A prime can be great, it forces you to really think "what can I do with this" because you don't have a zoom lens. You can move yourself around using the two-foot-zoom but that has its limitations as well. It forces you to think and choose what you can accomplish and you will learn the limits accordingly. At the same time, a zoom doesn't limit you in the same ways compositionally but won't have the same fast aperture the prime likely will.

In your position, if you have an 18-55 kit lens, having something that starts at 70 and goes out to 200 or so really covers a great deal of the territory you'll likely need. Maybe you'll find yourself wanting something wider, maybe something longer, but when you have the experience to make that decision confidently then you'll be spending your money in the most responsible way, rather than just winging it and buying whatever sounds good.

The 75-300 lenses are ok optically, I wouldn't shy away from those yet unless you really found the one you used objectionable.

Personally, with the 28-105, you have a lot of unnecessary overlap between it and the 18-55.