Currently I have two 1.6 crop bodies. I just gave my Tamron 17-50mm to a good buddy of mine. So I don't have a wide to standard telephoto lens. So I'm trying to decide what lens to get. This time I would like a Canon brand lens. Some time next year I plan on getting a 35mm sensor DSLR. That's kinda of the reason why I'm hesitant on getting an EF-S lens, but stuck it in the pole anyways. So that's why I'm at the crossroads right now.
unless you plan on absolutely getting one of those lenses later... why not just pick up a used 17-55 IS and then turn around and sell it when you go FF for little if any loss. Then you get the best lens for the mean time.
Get the right body first. I used to think it was all about lenses. The notion is true for the most part ONCE you have the right bodies. For me, bodies and lighting are most important, followed by computer system. Lenses are last (mostly due to the fact that I can easily rent lenses for cheap, but it is more of a pain to rent lighting and bodies).
Saad Syed wrote:
Get the right body first. I used to think it was all about lenses. The notion is true for the most part ONCE you have the right bodies. For me, bodies and lighting are most important, followed by computer system. Lenses are last (mostly due to the fact that I can easily rent lenses for cheap, but it is more of a pain to rent lighting and bodies).
Interesting. I guess it's been pounded in my head that everything is about the lenses. And it's true, till you get he right body like you mentioned.
Kinda surprising to hear. I'd much rather have good lenses and crap bodies. For about 3-4 years now just about any DSLR on the market will get the job done. Lenses last for years and bodies don't tend to hold up physically or as an investment in tools. Frankly, I'd keep the Tamron. You could shoot the rest of your career with that and only gear-acquisition-syndrome would make you go elsewhere.
I tried to amass some decent glass before I got my 5D II. But I have to tell you, I was PISSED when I found out my EF-S lens didn't work with it. Wouldn't even clamp up... UNLIKE my Sigma WA that was made for the XT but still worked on the 5D II but makes crazy weird pictures as seen through someone's nose holes.
Buy and use the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens for a while, and you may keep it mounted on a 1.6 camera body indefinitely.
This lens produces superb results on a Canon T1i (or an XSi). Note that so far, half the voters have picked this lens.
I've had it for over a year. Many of my best images have been captured using this outstanding lens.
Using the IS properly remains the hard part of the learning curve with this lens. The user has to press the shutter button half way to engage the IS. Then the IS mechanism takes a second or two to stabilize the len's internal workings to reduce motion.
Snapping the shutter instead of waiting may cause a blurred image because the IS has not yet engaged. After waiting briefly, then gradually and carefully press the shutter button the rest of the way. I've found that following through, by pressing the shutter button gently, until it bottomed, tends to eliminate IS problems. Using this technique, I can shoot a sharp image at a shutter speed as low as 1/4 second.
I ask because, we're talking 16-35 on a crop body is excellent glass and he can continue to chase the bodies next year...
Because getting a 5D doesnt help him if he only has 50, 70-200 or longer lenses
Does that make sense ? did I miss something ? I miss things a lot so I wouldnt be surprised...
So I could see getting a used 5D and a 17-40, but then he still doesnt have that middle 24-70 range he had before with the cropped body and the lens he gave his friend...
I don't know, I'd still get the glass and invest in the body later, you're always gonna lust after stuff, get the things that dont change too much so decisions can be made on the things that are constantly changing with the glass you have in mind...
You can prob sell a 17-55 2.8is next year for about what you pay for it..if you buy it used now. I have (but don't use anymore) the Tamron 17-50 2.8 and the Canon is much better. Much more expensive..but still, you won't be disappointed. If you liked the Tamron, you'll LOVE the Canon BUT it cannot be used on a FF body. The 16-35 will provide a similar range on a crop body, but it will be MUCH wider on a FF body...is that something you think you will use once you switch? I find 24mm to be irritating on a crop body but some people like it. Just not wide enough for most situations IMO.
I understand where you are coming from as I was going through the exact thoughts about lenses and bodies last night. I know that when my 7D comes back fixed I will love it and plan to use it with my 70-200 for weddings and also for some sports stuff I do on the side. Forecasting for 2011 and I have been thinking that a 5D II might be a very good purchase to make and what would I do then as I have the 17-55 as well (and LOVE IT)?
The math and versatility has me thinking 16-35 2.8 + 24-70 2.8 + Sigma 50mm 1.4 which means I can use all the lenses on any bodies. Most of my shots, but not all, are in the 17 to 33 range right now so I won’t be giving up too much but with the 18mp on the 7D and a 16-35 on a 5D II would be truly wide angle. I would also have the room to crop if my feet fail me or the situation doesn’t allow for me to move in.
With only one more wedding on December 19th I can make do with the equipment I have but I am looking to the future as I put together my business plan and how I am going to invest my funds in the coming year.
I’m not swapping any lenses until I get a new body to see what direction I ultimately take but I’m glad to see that I’m not alone in my thinking.
