Deciding on Lenses

[Kusca]

So I have decided to get a Canon 7D, Adorama does accept Canadian photography equipment, hopefully my A700 will serve and Alpha fan better than it did for me.

I have decided on the following lenses:
17-40mm f/4.0L
50mm f/1.8
200mm f/2.8L

I shoot mostly wide angle, what I am worried about is the 17-40mm not having Image Stabilization (as a matter of fact none of these lenses have it). At night taking city scape shots will be mostly done on a tripod, and hand held I will use the 50m f/1.8. But inside buildings in low light I would like to use a wide angle lens. Will the 17-40mm f/4.0L suffice? Is there better lens arrangement for the same price (preferably Canon EF mount)? Right now with these lenses the Canon 7D it comes out to roughly $3k on Adorama.

 

[reznap]

I can't see spending that kind of money on a 7D setup if you're not shooting sports/motorsports or action.

Get a 5d2 body + 50mm f/1.8 and a 17-40L and you'll be spending the same amount give or take 100-200$. Do you really NEED the telephoto? I hardly ever use my longer lenses.

 

[Kusca]

I can't see spending that kind of money on a 7D setup if you're not shooting sports/motorsports or action.

Get a 5d2 body + 50mm f/1.8 and a 17-40L and you'll be spending the same amount give or take 100-200$. Do you really NEED the telephoto? I hardly ever use my longer lenses.

Nope I have a Minolta 70-210mm f/4 and have only used it for 1-4 shots, out of thousands of shots. Might get the setup you suggest now, and later get the 200mm f/2.8. 3 things about the 5D mark ii worry me:
1. Low light AF not as good as the 7D
2. Replacement coming soon, possibly fixing the first issue, by getting the good parts of the 7D
3. Price of the replacement

My deadline is the second week of May before I go off for vacation for 4 months, so if the replacement comes out by then good, if not I will get a 5D mark II, and when the 5D mark iii comes out I could always sell this body and get the 5D mark III. There is nothing that says I cannot produce beautiful pictures with 5D mark II, thing is if I am paying this money I would like to have the newer one.

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

Get a tripod for night shots. Even if you had IS, tripod with mirror lockup and a cable release would be )etter especially at night.

 

[John Mc]

If your Shooting in Low light do you not usually use a Torch? I do if im using the Af on my 500D,And if i know the distance of the focus point i'll use the distance calcs on the lens and fine tweek. You should be using a tripod and cable release for landscapes/interiors instead of boosting Iso,which is what i used to do if i was shooting interiors

 

[bigtwinky]

I'd skip the 200 f/2.8 if you dont use telephotos.

What might hinder you with the 17-40 in low light is the f/4 aperture. Wide angles usually don't have IS. Why not look at the 16-35 f/2.8L ? Still no IS, nice lens, constant 2.8. You lose out on 36-40mm. That with the 50 1.8 or even 50 1.4 would be a nice start. Add a telephoto later on.

The 7D is very capable at ISO 3200 if you get the exposure right.

 

[Hardrock]

Personally I love the 17-40L it is a very very sharp lens and works great on my 50D. The only reason I would consider the 16-35 f/2.8 is because of the 16mm. I very rarely use f4 on my 17-40 so I say save half the money and get the 17-40. Also if you shoot mostly wide angles and want the 7d I think you might want to look at the 10-22 Canon or third party versions. As far as the telephotos they also make great landscape lens. But that is for you to decide. The 200 F/2.8 is also supposed to be very sharp. Like others have also said... get a tripod and cable release.