I thought i had decided but.......

[buckas]

£699 for the 50d from kerso, bought one last night

considered 2nd hand? http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/index.php?id=26&category_filter=20

 

[adsayer]

Ive heard good things also but would worry about warranty as they are usa imports.

Has anybody bought off kerso and then had a problem and been able to get it fixed under warranty?

Amy

The warranty provided by Kerso is an International one so it's absolutely fine Amy

ads

 

[akr]

Do you think you'll need the Sigma 12-24mm? For Weddings etc I'd imagine the 17-55 f2.8 might be more useful and should cover most of your range - would you need to go below 17mm for the work you would be doing?

 

[HoppyUK]

The warranty provided by Kerso is an International one so it's absolutely fine Amy

ads

^^^ True.

There was a thread about warranties with imported goods a couple of weeks ago and out of interest I contacted Kerso for his position.

He said he has never had a problem with Canon UK honouring warranty on his stuff and that in any case he would "always look after TP people." I think the key is that his goods come with a receipt from a UK address

 

[amyliz]

Do you think you'll need the Sigma 12-24mm? For Weddings etc I'd imagine the 17-55 f2.8 might be more useful and should cover most of your range - would you need to go below 17mm for the work you would be doing?

Hi,

Yeah true but the 17-55 looks just like the kit lens so will probably be the same inferior build quality?

Its a shame there isnt a 17-70 or 17-80 that will fit the canon that has IS?

Amy

 

[akr]

Hi,

Yeah true but the 17-55 looks just like the kit lens so will probably be the same inferior build quality?

Its a shame there isnt a 17-70 or 17-80 that will fit the canon that has IS?

Amy

Hi

I'm not sure re the build quality, it gets consistenly good feedback though - maybe worth asking wedding togs what they use (possbly more primes). That said I'm not sure it's worth getting the 12-24 just to have that range covered if you won't really use the lower half of it, maybe another low light prime instead?

There is a 17-85 IS canon but it's f4.5-5.6.

I'll bow out as these are not my areas I actually practise really at all but I think you need the lowlight for weddings the f2.8 gives you, for the many times flash is not allowed \ would disrupt the ceremony etc.

Good luck, I'm sure most people on here would be delighted to have your kit either way!

Al

 

[amyliz]

Hi akr,

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

Im not going to get the 12-24 as i wouldnt use that enough to warrant the money thinking about it.

I just wish i knew which way to go to have the full range of focal length from 17 or 18 all the way through to say 200/300

 

[swag72]

Hi,

Yeah true but the 17-55 looks just like the kit lens so will probably be the same inferior build quality?

The 17-55 is a really good lens in my opinion and spends a lot of time on my 50d. It is very sharp and in my experience has more than adequate build quality. Granted it doesn't have a red ring around it, but reviews very often cite it as a hidden 'L'. Don't dismiss it just because it's not L glass.

 

[amyliz]

The 17-55 is a really good lens in my opinion and spends a lot of time on my 50d. It is very sharp and in my experience has more than adequate build quality. Granted it doesn't have a red ring around it, but reviews very often cite it as a hidden 'L'. Don't dismiss it just because it's not L glass.

Hi,

To be honest the "L" means nothing to me anyway. Its just the build quality i would be looking for aswell as optical quality.

Could you please post me a pic or two up with that lens. One of 17mm and one of 55mm of same subject if possible.

Thanks

 

[HoppyUK]

...Im not going to get the 12-24 as i wouldnt use that enough to warrant the money thinking about it.

I just wish i knew which way to go to have the full range of focal length from 17 or 18 all the way through to say 200/300

If you are not going to get a super wide, then the 17-55 swings very strongly into contention. The 24-105 will just not be wide enough on a crop body, I think that is pretty safe to say. Don't be concerned about the build quality on the 17-55 2.8 IS - it is a high grade lens in every respect, as you would expect for the price. Get to handle one.

The ideal three Canon lens kit for a 50D is: 10-22, 17-55, 70-300 IS, and everyone one of those lenses is the best in its class. It's an exceptionally good set and is the mainstay of my outfit (even though I have swapped out the 70-300 and gone for a two lens option there of the 70-200L and 100-400L).

Of course there are plenty of alternatives, but that is the trio Canon intended to work as a set and if you want to devaite from it that's fine, but think twice about why. The gaps and overlaps are also fine - you need overlap with wide angles to save you swapping lenses too much on walkabout shooting, but it's much less necessary at the longer end and even a gap from 55-70mm is easily worked around. This is certainly the way I like to work anyway.

 

[amyliz]

If you are not going to get a super wide, then the 17-55 swings very strongly into contention. The 24-105 will just not be wide enough on a crop body, I think that is pretty safe to say. Don't be concerned about the build quality on the 17-55 2.8 IS - it is a high grade lens in every respect, as you would expect for the price. Get to handle one.

The ideal three Canon lens kit for a 50D is: 10-22, 17-55, 70-300 IS, and everyone one of those lenses is the best in its class. It's an exceptionally good set and is the mainstay of my outfit (even though I have swapped out the 70-300 and gone for a two lens option there of the 70-200L and 100-400L).

Of course there are plenty of alternatives, but that is the trio Canon intended to work as a set and if you want to devaite from it that's fine, but think twice about why. The gaps and overlaps are also fine - you need overlap with wide angles to save you swapping lenses too much on walkabout shooting, but it's much less necessary at the longer end and even a gap from 55-70mm is easily worked around. This is certainly the way I like to work anyway.

Hi,

Cheers for the reply. So the 70-300 is a good lens then?

If i got the 17-55 f2.8 the only benefit i would have from the 10-22 would be if i did landscape which im not so cant see the point in having it?

 

[HoppyUK]

Hi,

Cheers for the reply. So the 70-300 is a good lens then?

If i got the 17-55 f2.8 the only benefit i would have from the 10-22 would be if i did landscape which im not so cant see the point in having it?

You're welcome Amy.

Yes, the 70-300 IS is a good lens for sure. The only reason I don't have one, honestly, is because I want the reach of the 100-400L for wildlife. I'd like longer actually, but money goes through the roof over 400mm.

If you don't need a super-wide, certainly don't get one for the sake of it. In fact I would say buy just one thing at a time, and avoid the urge to rush out and get a complete kit right from the start - it is so easy to do the wrong thing.

I did that when I went digital and in the last four years I have bought 12 lenses in the quest for a perfect outfit. I have probably wasted a couple of grand buying the wrong lenses in haste and selling them shortly after. I am now down to just four as a basic outfit, from 10-400mm. It's been a tortuous process, but I think I'm now set for a while.

 

[cloudhunter]

In principle with the 50D, yes. Personally I would swap the 24-105 4 for a 17-55 2.8, to gain wider coverage and f/2.8 - 24mm isn't wide at all on crop format I would be forever changing lenses but that's a personal thing.

All lenses suffer from things like a bit of distortion, CA and vignetting from time to time, but if you buy Canon lenses you can run them through DPP (Canon's free Raw processor) and it automatically knows what lens you've used, at what f/number and focal length etc, and corrects it. Brilliant feature it is, too. Unique to Canon I think

Really??

 

[HoppyUK]

Really??

Yes. There's a good demo of DPP lens corrections here, on page 3 of this review of the Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS lens.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_17-85_4-5p6_is_usm_c16/page3.asp

DPP takes out almost all the CA, straightens distortion and removes vignetting (peripheral illumination). It knows the lens settings from the Exif info and picks out customised correction settings from its data base.

 

[spencer]

I dont understand

If you have 5 mins could you please explain that to me?

And your gonna spend three grand on kit?

Surley it would be better if you learnt the basics first before spending all that money?:shrug:

Then you may have a better ideal of what you want the camera to do?

Spence

 

[HoppyUK]

And your gonna spend three grand on kit?

Surley it would be better if you learnt the basics first before spending all that money?:shrug:

Then you may have a better ideal of what you want the camera to do?

Spence

Rather sensibly, the OP was asking a question about how IS works.

If everybody was required to have a good understanding of image staibilisation, or even "the basics" before they bought anything, not much kit would get sold at all...

The best way to learn is to get some decent kit and start using it, which the OP is doing.

 

[spencer]

Rather sensibly, the OP was asking a question about how IS works.

If everybody was required to have a good understanding of image staibilisation, or even "the basics" before they bought anything, not much kit would get sold at all...

The best way to learn is to get some decent kit and start using it, which the OP is doing.

I,m not saying she should not buy decent kit.
But perhaps buy just a camera with a kit lens & go from there.

Or buy second hand, as some people has already pointed out in the original post.

Spence

 

[pearce_jj]

I have to wonder if a used 5D would be a good bet, with say 50mm f1.4 all for less than a grand.

IMO we all (me included) get much too excited about having every conceivable mm of focal length "covered".