Lens for t2i?

[PandaMan]

What lens would you recommend to get great quality out of my t2i? As of now i have an 18-55, 35-80, 75-300, and a 50mm. I was planning on upgrading my body but i was told that i would see more of a difference with better lenses so im up in the air on what to do. Any advice is appreciated. Thanks

 

[Sarmad]

What lens would you recommend to get great quality out of my t2i? As of now i have an 18-55, 35-80, 75-300, and a 50mm. I was planning on upgrading my body but i was told that i would see more of a difference with better lenses so im up in the air on what to do. Any advice is appreciated. Thanks

If your budget allows go for a 70-200mm f2.8.

 

[raaskohx10]

Go for any canon lens with the letter "L" on it.

 

[o hey tyler]

What lens would you recommend to get great quality out of my t2i? As of now i have an 18-55, 35-80, 75-300, and a 50mm. I was planning on upgrading my body but i was told that i would see more of a difference with better lenses so im up in the air on what to do. Any advice is appreciated. Thanks

We really need to have an idea of your budget prior to recommending you a lens. We also need to know what you plan to shoot. As one member suggested, the 70-200/2.8 or even f/4 IS are both high quality, but wouldn't do much good if you're looking to take wide angle landscapes.

 

[Justman1020]

I posted in your other thread but, if you want to be under 1k,
17-40 F/4 L- about 750$
70-300 is-650-700$

but again, as Tyler pointed out budget is important and what you plan to shoot.

 

[PandaMan]

I posted in your other thread but, if you want to be under 1k,
17-40 F/4 L- about 750$
70-300 is-650-700$

but again, as Tyler pointed out budget is important and what you plan to shoot.

Yeah i just seen your other post. im definitely more insterested in something along the lines of the 17-40. I dont use my 75-300 much. Ok so i think ill take you up on your advice and invest in a lens as apposed to body.

 

[o hey tyler]

Yeah i just seen your other post. im definitely more insterested in something along the lines of the 17-40. I dont use my 75-300 much. Ok so i think ill take you up on your advice and invest in a lens as apposed to body.

So what's your budget? I take it you're looking for a wide angle? The 17-40L isn't THAT wide on a crop frame body. If you didn't have an APS-C body it would be great. You may want to look at the UWA tokina that's a constant f/2.8 IIRC.

 

[PandaMan]

So what's your budget? I take it you're looking for a wide angle? The 17-40L isn't THAT wide on a crop frame body. If you didn't have an APS-C body it would be great. You may want to look at the UWA tokina that's a constant f/2.8 IIRC.

My budget is definitely around a thousand and under. I dont want to go too wide and have my images start that wide angle/ fish eye effect and i believe that starts to happen around 15mm if im correct.. ?

 

[o hey tyler]

My budget is definitely around a thousand and under. I dont want to go too wide and have my images start that wide angle/ fish eye effect and i believe that starts to happen around 15mm if im correct.. ?

I wouldn't be concerned with that, and it would be around the 11mm mark on a crop frame camera where the distortion gets noticeable. It's also correctable in post. Considering you already have overlap with your current lens lineup, I would go for something wider or longer. The 17-40L on a crop frame camera just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It's not very wide, and it's not very fast. So it doesn't really have a lot going for it on a crop frame camera IMO.

 

[Sarmad]

I wouldn't use 17-40mm on a Crop sensor body! Not very much of a difference!

 

[PandaMan]

What lenses would you recommend?

 

[Justman1020]

There's a huge difference in quality of glass not to mention it won't act like a 17-40 so it won't be like the 18-55.

 

[christop]

There's a huge difference in quality of glass not to mention it won't act like a 17-40 so it won't be like the 18-55.

Um, a 17-40 will act exactly like a 17-40 because that's what it is. And it has a very similar range as an 18-55 (slightly wider at the wide end, but not as long at the long end). But yes, the quality is different than an 18-55 kit lens.

 

[PandaMan]

Well im definitely looking for a quality change in the new lens, but i definitely do want it to be wider and sharper. What would be the next step wider but not have the fisheye/wide angle distortion effect?

 

[TCampbell]

What are you shooting?

If this were me, three lenses come to mind. I like LOW FOCAL RATIO lenses and high quality optics. This gives me a lot of versatility and control over both lighting and depth of field (selective focus) that you don't get in variable focal ratio zooms like the kit lenses and most consumer zooms.

1) The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM -- pretty much the same focal length range as your kit 18-55mm lens EXCEPT it can provide f/2.8 all through the zoom range and it uses internal focusing (does not rotate when the lens focuses which is much nicer when you're using a polarizing filter with it) and it has a much faster focusing motor.

2) The EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM Macro -- you could use this as a portrait lens, product lens, or macro lens. This is THE sharpest EF-S lens Canon makes and it's a true 1:1 macro scale lens. I don't have a crop-frame camera anymore (well... I do, but it's dedicated for astrophotography), but I had this lens. It was my favorite EF-S lens. I currently own the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro and this 60mm macro, at less than half the cost, can easily compete with the "L" series lens on image quality. It really is a great lens.

3) If you ever plan to shoot any action photography, you'll probably eventually want to own the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. Warning: This is a VERY expensive lens. But there's a reason pretty much every pro eventually buys it.