Choosing the right lenses

[DeathDiesel]

Yes there are tons of threads, and lots of information. I have my list of lenses heavily narrowed down. Im going with a 70D body, and do currently have a 18-135mm kit lens, 55-250mm 50mm f1.8, and an 18-55mm kit lens. Some of these are gifts, so thats how I managed to have multiple lenses covering similar focal lengths. I do a lot of medium range animal shots, and landscape. Really those two combined make up 90% of my shots, so I figured id go with some common lenses that are pretty well known.

These are listed in order of which I intend on purchasing them:
70-200mm f4L non IS Lens $400-700
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM Lens Review

24-105mm IS USM Lens (Mostly a walk around lens) $400-700
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens Review

The last one is really where its in question, which im thinking of a very wide focal length IE:

10-22mm F3.5-4.5 USM Lens $400-500
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Lens Review

Really my question to you guys is: Do you see anything Im missing, and are there different lens/lenses that you would reccomend for my usage? Again the wide focal length is really the one im guessing on, and no im not saying im going out tommorow or even next week to buy all of these lenses, I will purchase them over time used, how long really depends on funds I suppose.

 

[iolair]

For medium range animal shots, the 70-200mm on crop is a great range.

I don't see the 24-105mm adds anything for either of the type of shots you say you're interested in (it's too narrow for a lot of landscape work and too wide for a lot of wildlife shots). If those types of shot are really key to you, I'd consider using the money instead to get the IS version of the 70-200 f/4, if you generally shoot hand-held this can make a huge difference to eliminating blur from camera shake.

I own the 10-22mm and it's a nice lens, great colour rendition and contrast, and the ultrawide end of the zoom range lets you get quite creative with your landscape compositions. However, I've come to believe it's not much better than the sigma or tamron alternatives, so you could save yourself some money there.

 

[DeathDiesel]

For medium range animal shots, the 70-200mm on crop is a great range.

I don't see the 24-105mm adds anything for either of the type of shots you say you're interested in (it's too narrow for a lot of landscape work and too wide for a lot of wildlife shots). If those types of shot are really key to you, I'd consider using the money instead to get the IS version of the 70-200 f/4, if you generally shoot hand-held this can make a huge difference to eliminating blur from camera shake.

I own the 10-22mm and it's a nice lens, great colour rendition and contrast, and the ultrawide end of the zoom range lets you get quite creative with your landscape compositions. However, I've come to believe it's not much better than the sigma or tamron alternatives, so you could save yourself some money there.

As long as its outdoors I should be able to have the shutter speed up high enough to eliminate camera shake shouldnt I? I know there will be times when its cloudy or overcast, but I can always bump up the iso then right? I just have a bit of a hard time justifying the extra 400$, when I could put that torwards another lens thats all.

 

[DeathDiesel]

Thoughts on Nikon lenses since im starting to lean more torwards it? Thinking of Nikon D7100 atm
Currently thoughts are for Nikon:
18-140mm Kit lens

50mm F1.8D
Amazon.com: Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: NIKON: Camera & Photo

70-300mm f4.5=5.6G ED IF AF-S VR
Amazon.com: Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VR Nikkor Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: NIKON: Camera & Photo

Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 with AF motor
Amazon.com: Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X116 Pro DX II Digital Zoom Lens (AF-S Motor) (for Nikon Cameras): TOKINA: Electronics

Should cover all the bases pretty well yeah?

 

[grafxman]

I have the Canon 24-105mm lens and I am underwhelmed with it as are some other folks. It's just not particularly sharp on my 6D. You don't say what kind of animals you shoot but if its wildlife I don't think you can do better than Sigma's 50-500mm. I've taken thousands of wildlife photos with that lens on my 7D and it is incredibly versatile. Among the many great things about it are it's ability to close focus, its 50mm bottom end and its terrific stabilizer system. You can shoot butterflies and other insects with it under 4 feet away at 500mm. I've used the 50mm setting to shoot panorama videos. It's only drawback is that it's a little heavy. Here's a few panorama videos:

Anhinga Trail panorama | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Loop Road 3 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Here's a 500mm butterfly shot:
IMG_0761 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

I suggest you rent one for a week, put it on your camera and leave it there. From what you describe I suspect it will meet all of your needs.

 

[eswebster]

The lenses you list are good, but it all depends on what you'd like to shoot. None of them have a wide aperture. For portraits the 70-200 will do well, but my guess is that you will eventually want a prime with a larger aperture to really bring the focus to your subject.

Again all in what you want to shoot but you asked what you're missing. You have all the popular focal lengths covered, just nothing that will isolate subjects or shoot in low light.

Think 50 1.4.

 

[DeathDiesel]

I have the Canon 24-105mm lens and I am underwhelmed with it as are some other folks. It's just not particularly sharp on my 6D. You don't say what kind of animals you shoot but if its wildlife I don't think you can do better than Sigma's 50-500mm. I've taken thousands of wildlife photos with that lens on my 7D and it is incredibly versatile. Among the many great things about it are it's ability to close focus, its 50mm bottom end and its terrific stabilizer system. You can shoot butterflies and other insects with it under 4 feet away at 500mm. I've used the 50mm setting to shoot panorama videos. It's only drawback is that it's a little heavy. Here's a few panorama videos:

Anhinga Trail panorama | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Loop Road 3 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Here's a 500mm butterfly shot:
IMG_0761 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

I suggest you rent one for a week, put it on your camera and leave it there. From what you describe I suspect it will meet all of your needs.

While i do need versatility, I dont think I really need a super zoom, let alone can afford one at $1,500 alone.

Also eswebster, while I do think a faster lens would be handy, a lot of my shots are done outdoors, as well as Im just now getting the hang of a 1.8F, let alone 1.4F. At more than 3 times the cost, Ill wait to play with the 50mm 1.8 and can always upgrade later.

 

[eswebster]

didnt see that you had the 1.8. Looks like you're on the right track with your lenses.

 

[grafxman]

I have the Canon 24-105mm lens and I am underwhelmed with it as are some other folks. It's just not particularly sharp on my 6D. You don't say what kind of animals you shoot but if its wildlife I don't think you can do better than Sigma's 50-500mm. I've taken thousands of wildlife photos with that lens on my 7D and it is incredibly versatile. Among the many great things about it are it's ability to close focus, its 50mm bottom end and its terrific stabilizer system. You can shoot butterflies and other insects with it under 4 feet away at 500mm. I've used the 50mm setting to shoot panorama videos. It's only drawback is that it's a little heavy. Here's a few panorama videos:

Anhinga Trail panorama | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Loop Road 3 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Here's a 500mm butterfly shot:
IMG_0761 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

I suggest you rent one for a week, put it on your camera and leave it there. From what you describe I suspect it will meet all of your needs.

While i do need versatility, I dont think I really need a super zoom, let alone can afford one at $1,500 alone.

Actually the Canon 24-105mm costs $1150 not the $400-$700 you mention. The 70-200mm f4L non IS Lens is $630 after rebate. By my math you would actually save nearly $200 by buying the Sigma 50-500mm at $1509. It is heavy which is why I suggested you rent one for a week, put it on your camera and shoot everything in sight with it. I recently spent 2 weeks in DC shooting the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History (4,288 photos but who's counting ) with my 6D and the 24-105mm. I was so aggravated with the limitations of that damn lens I seriously considered using the Sigma 50-500mm. If I wasn't on my feet 8-9 hours a day I would've used it. In my experience if you're shooting wildlife or just about anything else in a spontaneous manner you need a superzoom and one that focuses close is as versatile as you can get. Of course if you only take the occasional photo and don't mind spending a lot of time cropping your photos to get the image you want then maybe you're on the right track.