Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 end

Archive 2009 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

1361
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

My wife and I are stepping up are interests. I am surprising her with a new 7D with two lenses. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM and the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. It just arrived yesterday. All I can say is wow. My Budget was 5K and my above purchase came in just below that with CA tax and shipping from Newegg. I already have a preferred account there so that’s where I'll be buying my gear from.

I am starting to question my purchase of the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.
I have a few questions.
Would the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM or perhaps the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM be a better choice for a walk around lens? I went with the 17-55 because of the "IS". The 24-70L doesn't have the "IS" feature. I liked the 24-105L "IS" , but it was only available with the 5D mkII system at Newegg. Plus it is an f/4 instead of an f/2.8. I am a beginner, and I am not really sure what that means, however my wife will know. I was under the impression that a lower “f/*” number would result in clearer, sharper pictures. So I went the way I did for those reasons. I just want this to be a great gift for my wife. I want her to be completely thrilled and happy.

I am second guessing myself. Spending over a grand for a lens and not having the quality of the "L" style lenses is beginning to worry me. Is the "IS" really that important for a walk around lens? Do I really need an “f/2.8” lens for the absolute best pictures?

Please help me to make this a great Christmas for my wife.

Thanks
Dennis

Dec 12, 2009 at 09:10 PM

seraphkz
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

f2.8 means it can open up a bigger aperture, thus letting in more light.
A smaller F stop will give you more light, thus allowing you to shoot in low light situation. A smaller F stop will also provide a thinner DOF, and more pleasant bokeh.

17-55, even though it's not a L lens, has L lens quality. It isn't a L lens only because it only works on EF-S and FF cameras such as the 5D and 5Dmk2 can't use it.

Dec 12, 2009 at 09:36 PM

Mark_EL
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

I terms of mm's think you made a perfect choice. 24mm on a crop-camera is not that wide so 17mm is a lot better. And the difference between 55mm and 70mm is almost negligible.

Now, I don't have any experience with the Canon 17-55 but I have used a 24-105 on a 40D for a while and although I liked the reach on the tele end, the 24mm on the wide end was too narrow in a lot of occasions.... I really like the 24-105 reach on my full frame 5D. I only wished it was f 2.8 though. From what I have read, the 17-55 f2.8 is optically a L-quality lens so I wouldn't worry if I were you.

BTW.. I think your wife is a lucky woman... I wish my wife would buy me that kind of gear

Edited on Dec 12, 2009 at 09:45 PM · View previous versions

Dec 12, 2009 at 09:41 PM

rextilleon
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

Also, keep in mind that the 70-200mm is a pretty heavy lens and a tripod might be in order.

Dec 12, 2009 at 09:42 PM

jamad
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

17-55 is an excellent range for a walk around lens, offering more flexibility on the wide end without sacrificing speed compared to the 24-70.

Dec 12, 2009 at 09:45 PM

omarlyn
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

1361 wrote:
My Budget was 5K and my above purchase came in just below that with CA tax and shipping from Newegg....I liked the 24-105L "IS" , but ... it is an f/4 instead of an f/2.8. I am a beginner, and I am not really sure what that means...
Please help me to make this a great Christmas for my wife.

Thanks
Dennis

Big

to you for the big-budget wifey gift!

I'm sure she'll love it but as much as I'm sure you want to surprise her, it might have been wiser to let her choose since by your own admission you're not really sure what all the photographic terms mean. There are many different camera bodies & lenses because they each bring something different to the table and each has a pro & con. What your wife shoots & how makes a huge impact on what is ideally best....and only she can determine that. In any case, the 17-55 is a great lens so don't sweat it too much.

Omar

Dec 12, 2009 at 09:48 PM

martines34
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

My preference would be for the 24 - 105 because of the greater flexibility.

It is a wonderful lens.

It depends on what she will be shooting.

If your wife is just going to take snap shots then the 17 - 55 will be fine. If she is serious about her photography then she will appreciate the flexibility which a zoom lens offers.

Dec 12, 2009 at 09:51 PM

bpark42
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

martines34 wrote:
If your wife is just going to take snap shots then the 17 - 55 will be fine. If she is serious about her photography then she will appreciate the flexibility which a zoom lens offers.

This doesn't make much sense to me. First, the 17-55 is an outstanding lens and is certainly capable of taking snapshots or "serious" photographs. Second, it is a zoom lens, so I'm not sure what your last comment was intended to say...

Dec 12, 2009 at 10:04 PM

bpark42
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

1361 wrote:
I am starting to question my purchase of the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.
I have a few questions.
Would the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM or perhaps the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM be a better choice for a walk around lens? I went with the 17-55 because of the "IS". The 24-70L doesn't have the "IS" feature. I liked the 24-105L "IS" , but it was only available with the 5D mkII system at Newegg. Plus it is an f/4 instead of an f/2.8. I am a beginner, and I am not really sure what that means, however my wife will know. I was under the impression that a lower “f/*” number would result in clearer, sharper pictures. So I went the way I did for those reasons. I just want this to be a great gift for my wife. I want her to be completely thrilled and happy.

I believe it has been explained, but lower f stop numbers mean larger apertures. Essentially this means more light gets through the lens. It does not mean that pictures will be clearer or sharper. Either the 17-55 or the 24-105 will be great walkaround lenses. I personally would stick with the 17-55 on a 7D. 17 is much wider than 24.

1361 wrote:
I am second guessing myself. Spending over a grand for a lens and not having the quality of the "L" style lenses is beginning to worry me. Is the "IS" really that important for a walk around lens?
The 17-55 produces quality on par with L lenses, so don't worry about whether the lens has the red ring on it or not.

1361 wrote:
Do I really need an “f/2.8” lens for the absolute best pictures?
No, though there are a lot of advantages to having larger max apertures available, such as the ability to shoot in lower light and greater creative control over depth of field.

On that note, I would personally recommend you return the 70-200 f2.8. I have a feeling this lens will be overkill. Get the 70-200 f4 IS instead. It is cheaper, lighter, has better IS, and has better image quality.

Dec 12, 2009 at 10:10 PM

eosfun
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

Welcome to the forum.

My wife would not worry about 17-55 or 24-70 unless those figures meant carats

Don't worry, you bought a great set! The 17-55/2.8 is great for a crop camera, much better range than the 24+ L lenses you are thinking of. There give her 2.8 which is great for DOF and available light photography and you give her wide to 17 mm. = A broad vision widens your mind = Man, you are gonna have a warm christmas, with your love. Have EOSfun together

Dec 12, 2009 at 10:34 PM

kdlanejr
Online
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

You've made good choices. Stick with them.

Dec 12, 2009 at 11:31 PM

hfillmore
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

Depending on the usage, the lens you might want to reconsider is the 70-200 2.8. It's one hulluva heavy, large lens, weighing in at about three pounds. If travel, walk around, weight, and size are important, you might want to consider the f4 IS version instead. It's about half the size and weight, with better IQ.

The 17-55 is a no-brainer. The best walk around for the crop camera, without a doubt.

Dec 12, 2009 at 11:52 PM

harrygilbert
Online
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

My wife struggled with her 50D and even a lightweight tripod, so I got her a monopod with RRS swivel and QR. Fitted the camera with a Kirk L plate. She loves it.

Dec 13, 2009 at 02:11 AM

martines34
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

bpark42:

Since my opinion was not made clear to you:

I suggested the 24 - 105 because it has more flexibility (range) then the 17-55. I said that it was a personal preference which apparently you didn't read.

I guess the real question is - what does his wife prefer. We can postulate as to what might be good and not so good based on our own experience but, the real issue is what does the photographer (wife in this case) really prefer.

You have stated your case. Your preference is clear. The man asked for an opinion and I stated mine as you stated yours.

Have a happy holiday season.

Dec 13, 2009 at 02:30 AM

gdanmitchell
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

A few quick responses.

1. I think that the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is likely the best high-quality "normal zoom" for cropped sensor Canon bodies. Most people would not find the 24-XXmm lenses (one of which I own) to be better on this body. For one thing 24mm isn't really wide at all on crop.

2. I think your choices are fine, though I shudder a bit anytime I hear that someone is second-guessing their purchases as soon as they make them. I am of the opinion that you should be _certain_ that the gear is what you want before you order.

Take care,

Dan

1361 wrote:
My wife and I are stepping up are interests. I am surprising her with a new 7D with two lenses. Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM and the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. It just arrived yesterday. All I can say is wow. My Budget was 5K and my above purchase came in just below that with CA tax and shipping from Newegg. I already have a preferred account there so that’s where I'll be buying my gear from.

I am starting to question my purchase of the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.
I have a few questions.
Would the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM or perhaps the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM be a better choice for a walk around lens? I went with the 17-55 because of the "IS". The 24-70L doesn't have the "IS" feature. I liked the 24-105L "IS" , but it was only available with the 5D mkII system at Newegg. Plus it is an f/4 instead of an f/2.8. I am a beginner, and I am not really sure what that means, however my wife will know. I was under the impression that a lower “f/*” number would result in clearer, sharper pictures. So I went the way I did for those reasons. I just want this to be a great gift for my wife. I want her to be completely thrilled and happy.

I am second guessing myself. Spending over a grand for a lens and not having the quality of the "L" style lenses is beginning to worry me. Is the "IS" really that important for a walk around lens? Do I really need an “f/2.8” lens for the absolute best pictures?

Please help me to make this a great Christmas for my wife.

Thanks
Dennis

Dec 13, 2009 at 03:52 AM

ohyeah
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

The 70-200 f/4L is lighter, yes. But better IQ than the f/2.8? I've had both lenses, and have not found this to be true. Comparing both lenses wide open maybe, but the f/2.8L stopped down to f/4 and smaller is as good or better than the f/4L at any aperture. Having that extra stop is in so many ways better that the "only" way I'd prefer the f/4L is if weight was the deciding factor, period.

7D + 17-55mm f/2.8 + 70-200mm f/2.8L is an awesome setup. The only thing you may want to consider if you plan on using the flash, would be to pick up a 580EXII. The pop-up flash isn't tall enough to clear the 17-55's lens hood (which you should pick up if you haven't already).

Enjoy!!

Dec 13, 2009 at 04:51 AM

bpark42
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #17 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

ohyeah wrote:
The 70-200 f/4L is lighter, yes. But better IQ than the f/2.8? I've had both lenses, and have not found this to be true. Comparing both lenses wide open maybe, but the f/2.8L stopped down to f/4 and smaller is as good or better than the f/4L at any aperture. Having that extra stop is in so many ways better that the "only" way I'd prefer the f/4L is if weight was the deciding factor, period.
Enjoy!!

Are you talking about the IS version? The f4L IS is consistently rated the best of the Canon 70-200's. In many cases, I am sure the difference will not matter, since the artistic merits of the shot should carry it (vs. the largely technical concern of supreme sharpness), but even so, the f4L IS is possibly the best Canon zoom lens out there, and is certainly capable of beating up on its 70-200 f2.8 IS sibling a little bit, especially at 200mm.

I agree that it is great to have the extra stop, but I am not sure a "newbie", so to speak, will appreciate the virtues of the extra stop when weighed against the, ah, weight of the 2.8. The f4L IS makes a great (high end) starter telephoto zoom, IMO. The 2.8...maybe, maybe not.

For reference: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/196-canon-ef-70-200mm-f4-usm-l-is-test-report--review

EDIT: To save people some reading, if they aren't interesting in the whole review...

"The Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 USM L IS is the very best zoom lens tested to date in Canon mount. The resolution figures (center/border) at all focal length and all tested aperture settings are nothing short of stunning and also as good as the best fix-focals in this range. At f/11 there´s the usual decline in quality due to diffraction - this is a physical limit. Truly remarkable."

Edited on Dec 13, 2009 at 06:17 AM · View previous versions

Dec 13, 2009 at 06:08 AM

bpark42
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

martines34 wrote:
bpark42:

Since my opinion was not made clear to you:

I suggested the 24 - 105 because it has more flexibility (range) then the 17-55. I said that it was a personal preference which apparently you didn't read.

I guess the real question is - what does his wife prefer. We can postulate as to what might be good and not so good based on our own experience but, the real issue is what does the photographer (wife in this case) really prefer.

You have stated your case. Your preference is clear. The man asked for an opinion and I stated mine as you stated yours.

Have a happy holiday season.

I understand your opinion on the 24-105. I agree it has a more flexible range overall, though personally I would be unwilling to give up the 17-24 range on a crop body, as I said. I'm not challenging your right to your opinion at all.

My post was questioning the line of your post that I quoted. I still don't understand why you say the 17-55 is suitable if the OP's wife is only interested in snapshots. This is what does not make sense to me. It implies to a newcomer (or at least to me) that either a.) a more limited zoom range or b.) any non-L lens is only good for snapshots, not for "real" photographs. This is what I was challenging. Maybe I misunderstood what you intended?

Dec 13, 2009 at 06:15 AM

martines34
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

"My post was questioning the line of your post that I quoted. I still don't understand why you say the 17-55 is suitable if the OP's wife is only interested in snapshots. This is what does not make sense to me. It implies to a newcomer (or at least to me) that either a.) a more limited zoom range or b.) any non-L lens is only good for snapshots, not for "real" photographs. This is what I was challenging. Maybe I misunderstood what you intended?"

Your interpretation is correct and I was wrong in how I worded my response.

I believe in filling the frame as much as possible on the initial shot. I thought that the 28 - 105, for near the same money, would give the lady a wider range of possibilities and I didn't really mean to demean the 17 - 55 (which I have never shot).

I think we would both agree that is is almost impossible to make a decision for someone else especially, when we don't know their style of shooting.

Dec 13, 2009 at 02:26 PM

RobertLynn
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #20 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

seraphkz wrote:

17-55, even though it's not a L lens, has L lens quality. It isn't a L lens only because it only works on EF-S and FF cameras such as the 5D and 5Dmk2 can't use it.

No, it's not an L, because it's not an L. I wonder what "L" quality is anyway. I have 3 L lenses and 2 non-L's, and I think that in print, the IQ difference is hard to tell. Things like saturation, color and contrast come into play at this point but still.

To answer the OP's question (though it's been answered anyway).

The LOWER the f/ number, the WIDER the maximum aperture. An f/2.8 lens is a "fast" lens. The reason they use this (at least as it was explained to me, and I know there's another explanation out there) term is that the "faster" lens lets in MORE light to the sensor/film, and thus you would use a faster shutter speed.

The HIGHER the f/ number the more NARROW the maximum aperture.

You can "stop down" a wide aperture lens. So if you have an f/2.8 lens you can shoot it at f/2.8 or say 5.6 or 22. In some cases 32.

You cannot open up an aperture more than it's base aperture. Meaning, an f/2.8 lens cannot be wider than f/2.8.

IS is a handy feature, but not the most important in the world. Now granted, times have advanced and still photography technology has grown a ton. At the same time, we didn't have IS before. I'm not saying that we should shun it because it's new, but I'm saying that you may not need it as much as you're thinking.

The 17-55 f/2.8IS lens is a wonderful lens for a crop camera, and I think she'll have that lens glued to the camera for a majority of it's time.

The 70-200 2.8IS lens is also a wonderful lens. It is my main portraiture lens and I use it on every outdoor portrait session I do.

Dec 13, 2009 at 02:39 PM

EOS20
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #21 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

The 17-55 IS and 70-200 f/2.8 IS combo is great on a crop camera (The 7D) so you should just stick with this combo.

A 24-XX lens on a crop camera can be limiting unless you have another wider lens (which will end up costing you even more money, and will mean your wife will need to carry around another lens). I use to have a 24-105 IS which I used on my 40D which was ok, but I also had a 17-40 to cover the wide angle, I wouldn't want to have been limited to just having a 24-105 as my widest lens though.

There is also allot of overlap between the 24-105 and 70-200, so IMHO it doesn't really make a great combo since your only gaining another 95mm. I was shooting with a 100-400, so the 24-105 fitted into my setup nicely. I liked the 24-105 IS better on my 5DmkII.

24-70 is bigger, heavier, and lacks IS which is a very useful feature, and I think the 17-55 IS would most likely suit your wife better then the bigger/heavier lens.

I would say your best to just stick with the 2 lenses you have already purchased, and I'm sure your wife will be very happy with those two lenses.

Dec 13, 2009 at 02:43 PM

ohyeah
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #22 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

bpark42 wrote:
ohyeah wrote:
The 70-200 f/4L is lighter, yes. But better IQ than the f/2.8? I've had both lenses, and have not found this to be true. Comparing both lenses wide open maybe, but the f/2.8L stopped down to f/4 and smaller is as good or better than the f/4L at any aperture. Having that extra stop is in so many ways better that the "only" way I'd prefer the f/4L is if weight was the deciding factor, period.
Enjoy!!

Are you talking about the IS version? The f4L IS is consistently rated the best of the Canon 70-200's. In many cases, I am sure the difference will not matter, since the artistic merits of the shot should carry it (vs. the largely technical concern of supreme sharpness), but even so, the f4L IS is possibly the best Canon zoom lens out there, and is certainly capable of beating up on its 70-200 f2.8 IS sibling a little bit, especially at 200mm.

I agree that it is great to have the extra stop, but I am not sure a "newbie", so to speak, will appreciate the virtues of the extra stop when weighed against the, ah, weight of the 2.8. The f4L IS makes a great (high end) starter telephoto zoom, IMO. The 2.8...maybe, maybe not.

For reference: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/196-canon-ef-70-200mm-f4-usm-l-is-test-report--review

EDIT: To save people some reading, if they aren't interesting in the whole review...

"The Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 USM L IS is the very best zoom lens tested to date in Canon mount. The resolution figures (center/border) at all focal length and all tested aperture settings are nothing short of stunning and also as good as the best fix-focals in this range. At f/11 there´s the usual decline in quality due to diffraction - this is a physical limit. Truly remarkable."

I agree, the 70-200 f/4L IS is an amazing less that produces amazing images. But I had both at one time, and now only the f/2.8 IS. At f/4 on down, both lenses were virtually identical in IQ (for me). Sure, the f/4 with different sensors, focal lengths, apertures, etc. may be ever so slightly better in some tests than the f/2.8 IS. But the f/2.8 IS leaves it in the dust when you factor in all the benefits of it's extra full stop.

As for the weight, that's a personal preference, and wasn't an issue for me. But if that's an important factor to someone, then so be it. But leaving weight completely out of the comparison (and cost

), the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS could be one of the best zooms ever made, by any manufacturer. Paired with my 5D2, I'm constantly amazed at the images this combo can produce, and in just about any situation.

Dec 16, 2009 at 09:53 PM

Rob-Bob
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #23 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

EOS20 wrote:
The 17-55 IS and 70-200 f/2.8 IS combo is great on a crop camera (The 7D) so you should just stick with this combo.

+1

I just finally got a me 28-105.
-It will be a great mid-range, walk-around lens.
I also have the 2.8, 70-200- for more reach, but sometimes wider is nescessary.

--Now, I'd kill to get(NEXT Purchase)will/should be that 17-55mm for the wider range. I also am shooting with a crop-cam, so getting more on the wider side will also be wonderful.
I think that you made an excellent choice with the 70-200 & the 17-55mm.
I'd say perfect combo-gift.

Bob

Bob

Dec 16, 2009 at 10:07 PM

Jo Dilbeck
Online
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #24 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

hfillmore wrote:
Depending on the usage, the lens you might want to reconsider is the 70-200 2.8. It's one hulluva heavy, large lens, weighing in at about three pounds. If travel, walk around, weight, and size are important, you might want to consider the f4 IS version instead. It's about half the size and weight, with better IQ.

The 17-55 is a no-brainer. The best walk around for the crop camera, without a doubt.

Ditto the above. The 17-55 is definitely a keeper for the crop camera. The 70-200 F2.8 is indeed heavy, and incomparing my friends 2.8 to my F4 IS version, My F4 version is much sharper, and a helluva lot lighter. But, you can let her decide on Christmas day! I wish my husband knew enough to purchase me camera equipment for Christmas, I have to provide him the exact specifics of what I what, so where's the surprise in that?

Dec 16, 2009 at 10:38 PM

jrscls
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #25 · Buying my wife camera gear, have questions.

Stick with the lenses you bought. The 70-200 f2.8 IS will be better for portraits and events if the lights go low. The 17-55 f2.8 IS is also a very nice lens for crop bodies like the 7D. If you also plan to get a full frame like a 5D II, then the 24-105 is a better choice.

Dec 16, 2009 at 10:57 PM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end