Would this be a good setup for first camera?

swatpup32 · Feb 18, 2009

This is what I'm thinking about getting:
Canon 50D
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Lens Hoods

I'm not a hundred percent sure about the 24-105mm, if there's something better for the same price or lower please let me know.

I know it's about 3 grand in total, but I keep telling myself maybe I'll be able to make some of my money back in microstock (please don't correct me if I'm wrong

)

FidelCastrovich · Feb 18, 2009

The 24-105 is way too long for a crop body. I've seen it done, but i wouldn't want to walk around with a ~40mm lens.

Try the 17-55. It's a stop faster, and will satisfy most of your needs, range and quality wise. And a 70-200 f4 for a tele should work and you'll have a beautiful setup.

Emil.

Edit - You might also try the old 5D with the 24-105.

swatpup32 · Feb 18, 2009

Thanks for the heads up I'll check into the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/28 IS USM. I really want the 10-22mm lens so I'll just have to wait to get a telephoto lens.

I'm also looking for a good mini tripod that will fit nicely in a camera bag (10-22mm no IS).

Big Mike · Feb 18, 2009

Your lens choice completely depends on what & how you want to shoot. The 24-105mm L is a great lens, but I agree that as a 'standard' lens on that body, it's an awkward length because 24mm just isn't wide enough at times...but some people like it.
That may not be an issue for you if you also have the 10-22mm and don't mind switching lenses.

The 17-55mm F2.8 IS, is a fantastic lens but also rather expensive when you compare it to either the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 or the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8. If you don't need a wide aperture, the 17-85mm IS is a very decent lens although not quite on the same quality level as the L lenses or even the 17-55mm.

I have an 'UltraPod II' that lives in my camera bag, but there are many, many 'table top' sized tripods to choose from.

TUX424 · Feb 18, 2009

There is no need for IS or a Tripod on the 10-22 its just to wide to really suffer from camera shake
I wouldn't mind have a 50D, 10-22, 17-55 as my first camera and starting lens better then what i have now

JustAnEngineer · Feb 18, 2009

Shall we muddy the waters just a bit more and suggest that you consider the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 lens as an alternative to the Canon 10-22mm?

The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM is a great lens (and the one that I use the most), but it is twice as expensive as the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8.

anubis404 · Feb 18, 2009

I agree with Engineer. I would go with third party lenses and save money for a telephoto. The Tokina 12-24 F4 and 11-16 F2.8 are awesome lenses from what I've heard. To complement the Tokina, I would suggest a Sigma 18-50 2.8, which beat out the Nikkor 17-55 2.8 in some magazine tests. I would then start saving up for a Canon 70-200 F4.

Early · Feb 19, 2009

Instead of the 25-105 f4, I'd opt for the 24-70 f2.8. Of course, that's the range where I do the bulk of my shooting.

Samriel · Feb 19, 2009

I'm not sure if this is available outside of Japan or not, but I'd warmly suggest this tabletop tripod. I have used it for over a year now, and would almost go so far to call it my favorite piece of equipment. It's compact yet sturdy, and comes with a nice ball head. Cost around USD70 though.

swatpup32 · Feb 20, 2009

I appreciate all the replies. I'm going to go with the cannon 17-55mm, 10-22mm. I know they are quite a bit more expensive then the 3rd party, but I have the money and there is a marginal difference in quality between the cannon brand and the 3rd party brand. Amazon jacked up the price of the 50d body by a $100. So I'm gonna get the 28-135mm kit and hock the lens on ebay. Should make the price of the camera about a $1000.