Building a Canon Lens collection

Harlequin565

Harlequin565

Messages
8,684
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
No
I'm looking for some advice on the best way forward with L lenses here...

I've been struggling with glass for a long while now. I currently own:

Sigma 10-20 wide
Canon 50 f1.8
Canon 17-85
Sigma 70-300 APO

I've never been happy with the 17-85 but decided to pick it up because of the longer reach over the Sigma 24-70. So now I'm saving up to invest in a decent lens collection.

In terms of photography, I'll shoot anything. Portrait, Landscape, Wildlife, Sport... If I go out, the camera comes with me, and eventually I want a selection of lenses to cover "all" eventualities.

I can't say that there's a specific range that I prefer. I like to have the choice of different focal lengths. So I'm having a problem planning a lens collection.

Forgetting primes for the moment, as I know what I want there, I seem to have a few options:

1.
Sigma 10-20
Canon 17-40L
Canon 24-70L
Canon 70-200L
£2,600

2.
Sigma 10-20
Canon 24-105L
Canon 100-400L
£2,000

Option 1 covers the range from 10-200, with some very nice glass in there. However, I do like the long end of my 70-300 and feel I'd miss that extra range.

Option 2 is cheaper, and gives me more range, but I lose at the wide end. I could swap the Sigma for a Tokina 12-24, but I love my Sigma lens and don't want to fix what isn't broken.

The last point, is that this collection would have to be built slowly. I'm probably going to sell off my Canon 350D and the 17-85 to help fund the first lens, but after that it would be a while before the next one. Again, because of that, option 2 looks more appealing as the 24-105 would give me a great lens until I could scrape enough together for the 100-400.

Has anyone else had this dilemma? I just don't want to buy any more lenses that I have to sell, or trade in to upgrade. I just want a "do it once" approach, and be able to forget about it.

Cheers in advance! (Apart from the "Buy a Nikon" suggestions :suspect:)

-H
 
70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4TC will give you 280 F/4.
Is that close enough to 300mm for you?
Have a look at the sigma 70-200 rather than the Canon one, it will save you some ££££
 
I Have the 50d and shoot similar stuff. Don't discount the secondhand Market. I have the 10-22, 24-105, 70-200F4, 100-400, 1.4x tc and recently added the 2x tc and 50mm 1.4

covers everything I want to shoot. Mostly the 70-200 is in my lads camera bag but it's a cracking lens. Both this and the 10-22 are so light you just put them in the bag in case.
 
On option 1 why not look at the 24-105L and the 100-400L.

That would cover all bases too.

Alternatively why bother about some gaps in focal length? If you go for the 100-400L but keep the others the same, you will have a gap between 70 and 100mm. Is this a real breaker for you?
 
Thanks for all the replies folks. Quote pyramid starts here...

I Have the 50d and shoot similar stuff. Don't discount the secondhand Market.
Click to expand...
Have no fear. I intend to shop around to get the best prices, and second hand is definately a consideration.

70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4TC will give you 280 F/4. Is that close enough to 300mm for you?
Click to expand...
I hadn't thought about that. Although I've heard mixed reports about them. Are they any good?

Have a look at the sigma 70-200 rather than the Canon one, it will save you some ££££
Click to expand...
But at the end of the day, isn't the L glass better than the Sigma stuff? I'm happy to save & pay the price, rather than get glass that's not as good, but cheaper.

On option 1 why not look at the 24-105L and the 100-400L.

That would cover all bases too.

Alternatively why bother about some gaps in focal length? If you go for the 100-400L but keep the others the same, you will have a gap between 70 and 100mm. Is this a real breaker for you?
Click to expand...
Again - I hadn't thought of just buying them all! :love: I guess it's hard to justify spending so much money on camera equipment, when I'm not actually making money from it. As to the gap in focal lengths, I really noticed a big difference between the 18-55 kit lens and the 17-85 replacement I bought for it. As with all zooms though, there's always the option (especially in the mid-range) to use my feet instead.

Thanks for all the replies folks. It's really helped.

-H
 
Like you I shoot almost anything with emphasis on portraits and sports. I have Canon 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 300/4 plus 1.4 t/c on 1D bodies. There is nothing wrong that I can see in this combination. I don't do landscapes so you might want to add the 10-20 (although I didn't get on well with this on my Sony body), and the 300/4 might be redundant if you get the t/c.
 
Isn't the Siggy 10-20mm for crop sensors? If you plan on going full-frame you'll need an EX lens to match the Canon L's.

Siggy 12-24mm might be a better investment.

A.
 
It'll be a long while before I upgrade to full frame. Going to get some decent glass first, and by that time, the Sigma will have served me well.

-H
 
Anorakus said:
Isn't the Siggy 10-20mm for crop sensors? If you plan on going full-frame you'll need an EX lens to match the Canon L's.

Siggy 12-24mm might be a better investment.

A.
Click to expand...

Yup, but you can always sell on, plus a full frame camera has needs different lenses, i.e. the 17-40 would probably work out the rough equivalent of the 10-22 on a 1.6 crop. Don't lose much (if at all) if you buy second hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top