Calling Canon DSLR owners......What lenses you own?

[LeMansX5]

As the title says what lenses you own and for what purposes. I want to pick-up some lenses during holidays along with a good macro lens.
I currently have the 28-135mm.

[spacegraye70]

Originally Posted by LeMansX5

As the title says what lenses you own and for what purposes. I want to pick-up some lenses during holidays along with a good macro lens.
I currently have the 28-135mm.

my dad had a bunch of L lenses awhile back. they were really nice but he didn't take care of them so they all had small fungi problems.

[PersonaNonGrata]

Originally Posted by LeMansX5

As the title says what lenses you own and for what purposes. I want to pick-up some lenses during holidays along with a good macro lens.
I currently have the 28-135mm.

Sounds like someone will have some nice presents to himself.

In addition to the kit lens you have, which I think is pretty good actually, I have a 24-70mm f/2.8L that I like very much. It is fast, super sharp, has fairly versatile focal range (despite the 1.6 crop on our 40D/50D), and is very well made. It is on the heavy side though. I use mine for most applications but is sure excels for low light and indoor events. A slightly less expensive option is the 24-105mm f/4L IS and maybe a better option due to slightly greater range, lighter weight, and IS. I have a 70-200mm f4/L that I like very much. It is very sharp, highly portable for a zoom, and even without IS seems just fine. The price is quite reasonable too in either IS on non-IS version. For my main purposes of shooting dog shows outside in good light, it works great. I think this lens works very well for any purpose outside from sports to portraiture to landscapes. I have used the f/2.8L IS version and it is a bigazz lens to haul around. I still want one because the f/4 doesn't seem fast enough for indoor shooting but it is a bitch to carry and a bitch to pay for. I have considered a 70-200mm f/2.8L non-IS for the cost savings since I am willing to use a tripod or monopod when steadiness is needed.

There are probably only a few other lenses I want. I would like something wide but the crop cameras are a bit limited in the "L" lenses. We lose on the wide end but I don't want to buy an EF-S lens. I would like to stick to "L" lenses. I would also like a better all-around lens than my 24-70mm f/2.8L. It's a super lens just too heavy for too much walking around. And of course, I still covet the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS.

There are some Canon instant rebates right now until January 16, 2010. Link here.

I'm sure there are a couple of Canon "L" lens whores here who can add more than I can. You know who you are guys.

[Thunder22]

This whore sent a PM, I didn't want to expose myself in public

[motordavid]

Only the EFS 17-85mm on the 40D...
still thinking about, rationalizing & lusting after the 10-22 wide.

I GOOG a specific lens regularly and notice the prices jump
around like oil futures; but any good price comparo site usually
gives the current best price.

I need Santa to bring me that 10-22 "real wide"!

Canon EF-S 10-22MM F3.5-4.5 USM ULTRA-WIDE-ANGLE Zoom Lens: Compare Prices, View Price History and Read Reviews at NexTag

[ravenheart]

Here are the ones I have for my 50D along with my brief thoughts on them. I have ...

... the kit EF IS USM 28-135mm - I consider that my cheap walk-around lens. Gets good results without me being overly worried about banging it up a bit

... the EF-S IS USM 17-55mm @ 2.8 for indoors pics. Great for family events and such. It really is rather good in low light for people shots and it has enough zoom to frame without moving around alot. It is my most expensive lens (@ $1100) but has been well worth it so far as it is the lens that spend the most time on the camera. A downside though is that the lens will cast a shadow with the popup flash so it can be annoying the few times I forget to frame for cropping it out.

... the EF 70-300 IS USM. This is my least used lens, but for those few ocasions when wildlife or pets are in the grassland behind our house its come in handy. Sure it will be useful for nature shots during upcoming trips.

My rationale for picking these lenses was to cover the ranges I have taken pictures at in the past, and to get Image Stabilization because I dont have steady hands. Worth noting is that there is no real macro lens in there. Might pick up a cheap one at some point, but macro just is not something I do alot of, so who knows...

[ilikebeer]

Too many lenses...it's gotten out of hand! Shooting with 1D series bodies.

For a general purpose zoom, the 24-70 f/2.8L and 24-105 f/4L IS are both excellent choices. My 24-70 is sharper than my 24-105, which is apparently not usually the case. The one-stop advantage in speed is nice if the subject is moving at all; if not, I prefer the 24-105 because of the 3-stop IS, lighter weight, and zoom design. I also have the 17-40 f/4L and 70-200 f/2.8 L IS, if you're interested in an opinion on either of those. Another post suggested you'd be using this on a 1.6x crop body; the 70-200 is extremely long, even at the short end, on a 1.6x body. A good comparison site for Canon lenses is the-digital-picture dot com; they have lots of crop samples for the various lenses at different apertures on different bodies but with the same framing; just be aware that there can be a significant amount of variance between what they show and what you might get, as the bodies and lenses all have differing calibrations in my experience.

I've generally moved toward shooting primes whenever possible, but I don't have any macro lenses, so no help for you there; I think the 24-105 has a slightly higher magnification than the 24-70, but you can check online whether I'm right or wrong. I've got a bunch of ridiculously priced primes if you wanted an opinion there. A great value, IMHO, is the 50 f/1.4 USM.

As a general aside, it's always a good idea to test drive lenses for a day or two to see if you like them. The weight/handling, FOV, depth-of-field, image quality, etc., are things you can't really determine unless you actually have one in hand. There's lots of places that do rent and will deduct the price from any lens purchase. In addition, many B&M shops will match (or come close to matching) the B&Hs of the world if you ask; if cost is a really big concern, I highly recommend keh dot com as a reputable buyer/seller of used gear; alternatively, the buy/sell forum at fredmiranda dot com can be an awesome source of used gear, with all the requisite precautions taken, of course.

[E61Silver]

I got a 18-200 and really like it. It is heavy but the range of lens does give you the ability to take better photos.

[ravenheart]

Recently bought a Sigma 150-500 mm and I figured it was worth recommending.

When spring hit I started taking pictures of the birds behind our house using the 70-300 mm lens but found myself always wanting more reach. After some research I realised the only lens within a pricerange that would not summon the fury of the CEO was the Sigma 150-500 mm OS lens (known as 'the Bigmos'). The main draw of the lens is that it is suposed to be possible to handhold at 500 mm. Also it is not white like the L telephotos so it does not scream PAPARAZZI!!!

Got the lens and a couple of filters for ~$1040 with S/H from king camera - was a disapointing experience since it took them a week to get the lens to me even though I bought overnight shipping - so when the lens came spring had gone and we had 2 weeks straight of rain

The lens itself though is fun as hell I am not going to do a review - there are lots of those done by people who actually know what they are talking about so I will just give you some quick thoughts:

- It can indeed be handheld at 500 mm (in my case on the 50D it is an equivelant 800 mm) and it still gets good results.
- It does require a lot of light so on a sunny day I shoot ISO 400 to get 1/800 @ F8 which I find is the low limit for what I need for good pictures without shake.
- The OS is crazy good but it does take a second to kick in and is a little noisy.
- Focus is fast - matching any of the Canon lenses I have.
- Image quality is decent - could be better but considering the price and specs it is as good as one can reasonably expect. The main problem is probably dark corners becoming noticeble if shooting at the sky.
- It is a heavy lens - with the 50D I would say its about 6-7 lb worth - which is alright for handholding for a few minutes at a time, but I would definatly not want to carry it around for long.

Overall I am very happy with the Bigmos - anyone wanting to take pictures of birds and other wildlife should consider it

Anywho - here is a smattering of pictures I've taken with the lens:

[ard]

One of my 'funnest' lenses is a 10.5mm fish eye (Nikkor)....