What is my next lens?

[tsipma]

I have been taking pictures for about a month or so. I purchased a Canon EOS 20D from a friend of mine. It came with an EFS 18-55. He also set me up with an EF 75-3001:4-5.6. For the limit of what I do, these are good lenses, I am sure, but I also know that a certain percentage of good photography is the equipment. I am most interested in shooting landscape and wildlife (either in the wild or at the zoo). My question is pretty simple. What should my next lens(es) be and why?

 

[RebeccaAPhotography]

How much are you lookin to spend?

 

[tsipma]

I know cost is often a factor and I don't think I am going out to spend $2000 on a lens this early on, but let's just pretend cost isn't a factor.

 

[Overread]

Cost is a big factor for wildlife - good wildlife lenses get expensive really really quickly (sadly its one area that is expensive in photography unless you are very good at tracking).

For wildlife and zoo you could consider:

70-200mm f4 or f2.8 lenses - a good range for zoo shooting and the variable zoom is very useful as subject size and distance changes a lot in that environment.
In an ideal world a f2.8 IS MII would be the best option - that you can also get teleconverters for and push to a 140-400mm lens for wildlife situations.

300mm f4 IS L - 400mm f5.6 L - 100-400mm IS L = each of them is a good solid wildlife lens and the trio are some of the most hotly debated for those getting into wildlife. Each one delivers good results, but each one has its own specific properties to consider. Also note the 70-200mm MII mentioned above when used with the 2*TC equals around the same optical performance as the 100-400mm mentioned here - making the shorter zoom a good option for combining the two uses if one so desires.

From then there are some much more expensive lenses.


Wideangle wise you might find the reviews over a Juza's site of help (he also lists a lot of good general nature article and reviews on the longer lenses as well)
Juza Nature Photography - Articles

Scroll down for reviews and articles - he's covered most of the super wide angle lenses for crop sensors.


A personal note - the 70-200mm range I find is also a good landscape lens, not for those super wide shots, but for isolation of those select features within the landscape (and yes reading this you can tell what lens I might be a fan of ).

 

[Ballistics]

I know cost is often a factor and I don't think I am going out to spend $2000 on a lens this early on, but let's just pretend cost isn't a factor.

Well, cost is the only factor after you have decided what you want a lens for. You can buy the same lens from a different company and it's either $400, $1000, or $2000. You have to determine the budget. Also, wildlife and landscape are almost like polar opposites.

 

[tsipma]

I know cost is often a factor and I don't think I am going out to spend $2000 on a lens this early on, but let's just pretend cost isn't a factor.

Well, cost is the only factor after you have decided what you want a lens for. You can buy the same lens from a different company and it's either $400, $1000, or $2000. You have to determine the budget. Also, wildlife and landscape are almost like polar opposites.

The reason I didn't want to put cost as a factor is because I don't want to limit my equipment based on budget but rather budget for the right equipment.

 

[Ballistics]

I know cost is often a factor and I don't think I am going out to spend $2000 on a lens this early on, but let's just pretend cost isn't a factor.

Well, cost is the only factor after you have decided what you want a lens for. You can buy the same lens from a different company and it's either $400, $1000, or $2000. You have to determine the budget. Also, wildlife and landscape are almost like polar opposites.

The reason I didn't want to put cost as a factor is because I don't want to limit my equipment based on budget but rather budget for the right equipment.

You gotta understand though, that there are lenses for wildlife that could be $6000.

Canon EF 17-40mm gets good reviews for landscape. It's around $700.
For wildlife, the 70-300mm L lens also gets good reviews. I think that's a $1400 lens.

 

[Overread]

It's a good policy - but I find that it helps if you give a starting price. That focuses the discussion around a central point and then you can branch out from there to looking at what is of a higher budget. Leaving it budget free things tend to end up focusing at either end of the extremes (either the dirt cheapest or the most expensive).

 

[tsipma]

It's a good policy - but I find that it helps if you give a starting price. That focuses the discussion around a central point and then you can branch out from there to looking at what is of a higher budget. Leaving it budget free things tend to end up focusing at either end of the extremes (either the dirt cheapest or the most expensive).

With that said, if I were to get a lens in the next month or so, I could see myself spending $500-$800. If I were able to wait a few months, I could probably budget (and justify to the wife) $1500-$2000

 

[Josh66]

You can buy the same lens from a different company and it's either $400, $1000, or $2000.

Two of those companies would not be getting my business...

 

[tsipma]

You can buy the same lens from a different company and it's either $400, $1000, or $2000.

Two of those companies would not be getting my business...

Kind of my thoughts as well. I guess another question along the lines of this thread: Where would you buy the lens?

 

[Josh66]

You can buy the same lens from a different company and it's either $400, $1000, or $2000.

Two of those companies would not be getting my business...

Kind of my thoughts as well. I guess another question along the lines of this thread: Where would you buy the lens?

Somewhere reputable like B&H or Adorama. Check KEH.com too for used stuff.

 

[awdSTi]

I recommend going through b&h they also sell used lenses so you could get a kickass lense for cheaper!

As for a lense I had the 100mm fix macro lens from canon and that was an awesome afforable lens, it was around 500. I would also sugguest getting a flash and battery grip with extra batteries before another lens tho!

Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk

 

[Kerbouchard]

I recommend going through b&h they also sell used lenses so you could get a kickass lense for cheaper!

... I would also sugguest getting a flash and battery grip with extra batteries before another lens tho!

While I would generally agree with your statement, if the OP is interested in wildlife and nature, a flash wouldn't be very useful and a battery grip is debatable.

I would say a good tripod would be something worth considering.

As far as a Canon Lens, it seems your kit lens should be able to take acceptable landscape photos. About the cheapest noticable step up for the wildlife would be the Canon 70-200 2.8 or f/4.

 

[scorpion_tyr]

For landscapes you'll want as wide as you can get, but something with some zoom so you can control just how wide. 18mm isn't bad at all, but I like a good 10-20mm. Having a lens with a large maximum aperture isn't a big deal for landscapes since you're usually shooting at f/8 and higher so focus on one that's sharp at a high f/stop. For wildlife the 75-300mm is a pretty good range, especially on a cropped sensor.For anyone who doesn't have one I suggest a nifty fifty aka a 50mm f/1.8. You should be able to find the Canon version for less than $100.00, but honestly it's not a good choice for landscapes or wildlife unless you get CLOSE.A good option for wildlife is either a fast lens with high focal length such as a 300 or 400mm f/2.8, but you're gonna pay $3,000-12,000 on one of those. Personally I would suggest upgrading cameras to one that has a lot better performance at high ISO's (1600 +) and get a lens with a crazy insane focal length range such as an 18-200mm and/or a 50-500mm. You could get a good new or used camera and both of those lenses for less than some of the glass other people are talking about.