A great combo of lenses that won’t break the bank

[Antonio]

Hi fellow shooters,

I wrote an article about my decision process when it came to purchasing a combo of high quality lenses without spending a fortune. I use a 30D so this applies to any owner of Canon EOS 1.6x crop bodies. I hope you'll find this useful.

Long story short, here is my combo:

• Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens (which I already own)
• Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4 AT-X 124AF Pro DX
• Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
• Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

You can click here to read the full article.

I hope this will help other people who are in a similar situation.

Cheers,
Antonio

[jfrancho]

I didn't read the article, but in general, I'll agree that your choices are a sensible balance between price, versatility, and image quality. But for one exception: the 50 f/1.8 II. I tested both the original, metal mount, the Mark II, and the EF 50 f/1.4. The focusing mechanism on both the f/1.8's suffered from sloppy play, and resulted in inconsistency in my AF tests. They also did not have USM, with full time MF which may not be important to the beginner, has become a must have for any lens purchases now - especially for fast primes. All that said, if you cannot afford to have a fast prime beyond that $80 range, then really, focusing issues aside, you must get the f/1.8. A fast prime opens up too many possibilities to go with out.

[Antonio]

Originally Posted by jfrancho

...the f/1.8's suffered from sloppy play, and resulted in inconsistency in my AF tests. They also did not have USM, with full time MF which may not be important to the beginner, has become a must have for any lens purchases now - especially for fast primes. All that said, if you cannot afford to have a fast prime beyond that $80 range, then really, focusing issues aside, you must get the f/1.8. A fast prime opens up too many possibilities to go with out.

Agreed. In my article I also mention the AF issue.

[jfrancho]

just peeked at the article - very nice - and I like that you have real world samples from PBase linked to each lens recommended.

[Antonio]

Originally Posted by jfrancho

just peeked at the article - very nice - and I like that you have real world samples from PBase linked to each lens recommended.

Thanks mate, I appreciate that.

[Sidebyte]

Good choices, the only one I would add is the Canon 300 F4.0, one of the best of the lot for small dollars.

[jfrancho]

The EF 300mm f/4L IS is an amazing bargain, all things considered, but at $1150, unfortunately does not fit the criteria outlined in the article:

* Excellent image quality
* Fixed maximum aperture (at least f/4) across the zoom range
* Well built
* Stellar reviews
* Less than $600

[Sidebyte]

I wasn't referring to the IS model, the 300L before the IS can be Ebayed for less than $600.

[jfrancho]

Ahhhh. Buying used is always a good way to save some money. I've bought several lenses form ebay.

[aam1234]

I would add the 17-40. Though it is slightly above the $600 criteria (at around $680).

[jfrancho]

It is a great lens - I have one - but doesn't quite fit in the total coverage package that Antonio is suggesting. Remember, he is putting together a range of lenses to cover several shooting styles that won't break the bank.

[aam1234]

Which criteria did it break.

If you mean the Tokina's 12-24 range then I for one would go with the 17-40.

[jfrancho]

No criteria broken, though you'd lose the UWA coverage. It's a good choice to supplement the list with a very high quality, versatile lens.

[Fymoh]

This is a very helpful thread. Thanks a lot. have a karma on me.

[SquirrelDip]

At the wide end there is a big difference between 12mm and 17mm. Actually trying out a 10-22 vs the 17-40 was what made me choose the former.

[trentchau]

the 17-70 sigma actually gets a decent vote from me also. Not fix stop (I loved my old tamron) but the sigma is pretty awesome.