Which Lens for 10D

[David]

Actually, there shouldn't be too much fuss about which lens to get... You just need to know your interest and how often u shoot them, look at the focal length of the lens and multiply by 1.6x to see if appropriate.

If portrait and wildlife are your favorites, you should be looking at typically anything between 85 - 400mm with or without teleconverters.

As for landscapes, personally, I don't like using a DSLR (well at least for the Canon D30 to 10D series) at the moment cos it's very limited for me to get that really wide view.

I tend to agree with ST1100 somewhat that the lens will make little difference to your shots in terms of sharpness at least. From my experience, I can't see any such difference using an L or the consumer lenses. But of cos, as he has mentioned, it feels good to hold an L around and make urself look professional, though that has very little to do with the quality of your shots. Unless u need a wider aperture in your shoot.

 

[ST1100]

Originally posted by Matrix
Just came back from work. :faint:

Actually, my favorite is wildlife(e.g. Bird) & portrait. But sometime landscape and candid shot.

Ap quote me,
1. EOS 10D ~ $2650 >>>> cheap?
2. EF 17-40 f4 L ~ $1250 >>>> cheap?

You mean you haven't bought your dSLR yet? i thot you bought already, so i didn't mention this before... but since you haven't bought, you might want to consider this: Your 10D+CF cards will be in the 3k range, plus a 1k budget for lens, total 4k+.

With a 4k budget, you can get a new EOS 3 (~1.5k) or Canon's very top-of-the-line-state-of-the-art weather-sealed professional EOS 1V for about 2.3k 2H, mint. This is Canon BEST film slr on the market right now, and possibly the last for a long while while Canon goes heavy into digital R&D.

They are a lot more camera than the 10D. By comparison, my EOS 3 (vs 10D) has bigger, brighter viewfinder, much faster AF, faster frame rate, better metering, and generally feels more... for want of a better word, stable/secure. While my EOS 3 backs up my 10D, in truth i think the 10D has a much higher chance of failure than the 3.

So as not to be called a hypocrite down the line, i should add that i do prefer the 10D to the 3, but only bcoz i am lazy and the digital workflow from shoot to print is much faster. i told myself that i'd keep the 3 for wide angles and faster AF and frame rates, but so far i've only shot 1 roll on the 3 since i got my 10D.

BTW, wildlife photography, esp bird (i assume you're not shooting ostriches) photography, is very demanding on the equipment. Probably second only to long-distance low-light sports photography. Long fast lenses, heavy tripods.

 

[neptune]

Unless you are comfortable with second hand lenses I don't think any of the L lenses are within your budget.

 

[togu]

Originally posted by Matrix
Btw, I :embrass: go down to SEED as I dunno anyone of u in person. What did u guys do during the SEED ah?

You can look for these people, they'll be more then happy to help you.

If you want to try, I can bring my 28-135 down too.

 

[Matrix]

Who is that on the extreme right ah?


Btw, I will try some lens tomorrow or sat.

I will either go for;

package 1
[EOS 10D + 28-135 IS USM]

or

package 2
[EOS 10D + 17-40 f4 L]

Then hope that I could get myself a 70-200 f2.8 IS L beginning of next year. :heart:


Package 1 and 2 which is more worth it??? please help me...:dunno:

 

[ivor]

That's the all famous togu...

Originally posted by Matrix
Who is that on the extreme right ah?

 

[tomshen]

Depending on what u wanna shoot. Here is my initial setup: Sigma 70-200/f2.8 + Sigma 20/f1.8. With these two lenses, I've covered a lot of different subjects. The reason why I avoid mid-range is due to personal preference: I like to take close-ups, either tele or wide. And now, I have established my own style and been able to decide what I want.

So, the first question to ask is: what kinds of picture do you want to take?

 

[NorthernLights]

Originally posted by Matrix
Who is that on the extreme right ah?


Btw, I will try some lens tomorrow or sat.

I will either go for;

package 1
[EOS 10D + 28-135 IS USM]

or

package 2
[EOS 10D + 17-40 f4 L]

Then hope that I could get myself a 70-200 f2.8 IS L beginning of next year. :heart:

Matrix,

I believe you shoot a lot of landscapes.

Package 2 is better as you need to just own one solid zoom lens. Take plenty of landscapes and closeups. Wait until you are ok again and buy the 70-200 f4 L. Forget about the 70-200 f2.8 L, it's a bazuka for the solid pro photographers. For me, I don't deserve and will not spend that $ as an amateur. Yet, I don't want to upgrade...I went through your thoughts..a month ago.

Alternatively, get the 14-1000mm f0.8 LOL USM lens. Perfect!!

 

[sehsuan]

Originally posted by NorthernLights
Alternatively, get the 14-1000mm f0.8 LOL USM lens. Perfect!! [/B]

how about the 1400-100,000mm LOL2 USM5 lens? i want to see neil armstrong's footprints on the moon...

hey, but seriously, what's the aga-aga price for the 17-40L?

 

[Belle&Sebastain]

hey, but seriously, what's the aga-aga price for the 17-40L?

1220

 

[sehsuan]

thanks. my father just mentioned the lens to me, and my immediate reaction was, "What? L lens?"

 

[ST1100]

Originally posted by sehsuan


i want to see neil armstrong's footprints on the moon...

i know you're just joking, but anyway here's interesting link that suggests you might not see any footprints no matter what lens you have:

http://moonhoax1.tripod.com/MoonHoax/

Just search for "Moon Hoax" on any search engine and you'll turn up a ton of stuff.

Actually it's interesting to us photogs, bcoz a lot of the refutes are based on photos supposedly taken on the moon.

 

[Matrix]

Just tried out the 28-135 IS USM & 17-40 f4 L.

Seriously speaking I can't see the difference in term of sharpen. To me 28-135 already very sharp leh. L or non L what the difference????


I notice some shot a 1/3 with IS set to "ON" still got a blur picture leh. With IS, do I need to wait for a while to let the IS activate before fully depress the shutter button??

 

[Matrix]

Originally posted by Belle&Sebastain
1220

May I know which shop is offering $1220?

 

[togu]

Originally posted by Matrix
Just tried out the 28-135 IS USM & 17-40 f4 L.

Seriously speaking I can't see the difference in term of sharpen. To me 28-135 already very sharp leh. L or non L what the difference????


I notice some shot a 1/3 with IS set to "ON" still got a blur picture leh. With IS, do I need to wait for a while to let the IS activate before fully depress the shutter button??

Hoho, that's simple then, no offence, drop the idea of L lens, think of them when you can see the difference.

Just my 0.02 cents

 

[ivor]

:thumbsup: Agree...

Originally posted by togu
Hoho, that's simple then, no offence, drop the idea of L lens, think of them when you can see the difference.

Just my 0.02 cents

 

[liuhao]

Originally posted by ivor
:thumbsup: Agree...

you have to know the difference before you can make difference. heehee...maybe i am not in the position to say this, sometimes i dun know the difference myself.

 

[Revo]

Altho i dun have a dslr but i did consider to buy the 28-135IS some time back.

I read a fellow clubsnappers (Edmund) review of the lens...maybe u be int. to read if u haven seen it yet?

28-135 IS

hope its useful to u.