What would you buy. (its a long one)

[brdy]

Okay Iam sure you seasoned photographers get asked this question all the time. If you can point me in the direction of some decisive documentation on the subject then that would be great. But what I would really like is some of you experienced photographers giving me some decisive advise. On choosing a few lenses.
I expect most to say …..“ well it depends what you want to do “ ….this is the sort of no committal advise you get from reading articles about lenses etc.. Is there anyone out there that has come from a background such as me and can understand where I am at now. I just like taking photos and trying to get best picture I can …it’s a hobbie…. I travel a fair bit and have 6 grand kids and used to work in wildlife research , live in the Northern Territory of Australia. So guess what Iam saying is, :- I take portrait pictures of my grand kids, I work in an Aboriginal art gallery I take pictures of paintings, I enjoy the outside and visit remote bush communities so I take landscapes. I travel to China and Europe so travel photography is high on my list. I currently have a Canon G11. As you probably know it’s a point and shoot , but its also a great little camera that has taught me a lot. However , the pictures that I first thought were out of this world are no longer cutting it.
I now want more from image quality my little 6.1 to 30.5 mm lens with 4.6 crop factor is just not good enough, especially in low light, or medium light if things are moving, I want sharper focus and I want to be able to take photos quicker. I don’t want photo quality to drop when I put it into burst mode, I want much less noise at higher ISO. Currently anything higher than 400 ISO starts to produce noise that’s not acceptable anymore. The next step for me is an DSLR
Of course now the big BUT : but I don’t have the money to go and buy top of the range camera and lenses. So like most things in life it comes down to a compromise.
From what I have read it comes down to the quality of the “glass” MORE than the camera its attached to… is this correct…? New Camera bodies seem to come out on a fairly regular basis, but a good lens is a good lens and can be stuck on any camera that share the same connection right.. I have a limited budget of $3,000 ish
So I was thinking of buying a Canon 60 D for $840 Australian and then the rest on some “glass” so to speak.
I know $3,000.00 is not much especially when the pro cameras themselves are more than this. But I am not a pro and Iam at this stage just wanting to move to a DSLR. Why do I like the 60D I don’t know I have no experience with any DSLR, but I do have experience with that flip out fold away swivel LCD screen and I love it .. I think we are going to see more of these on cameras in the future, to be honest I don’t know how you got on without them in the past (((( smile ))) .. You can take photos over peoples heads under there feet close to the ground, you can take photos of people without them even knowing your holding a camera etc etc etc .. SO Iam partial to that feature, the 60D also fits my budget. I’d like a 7D but then it doesn’t leave me much for “glass”. So now my main question .
I have a 60D camera body no lenses and and just over $2000.00 to spend on lenses. WHAT LENSES WOULD YOU BUY ??
I know the 60D comes with some cheap kit lenses but I have been told that I wouldn’t achieve much if I relied on those, bit like putting a lawn mower engine in your Lamborghini.
However , I think , regardless of what else I buy, I will probably buy the Canon 50mm f1.8 II prime lens .. its only $96 and I have read many experts saying it’s a great simple lens that would demonstrate what prime lenses are about and is good on an ASP-C sensor as a portrait lens. I have heard this from a number of sources and-.hey its less than $100. BUT that leaves me with $2100.00

Now like I say I have no experience with DSLR or lenses. How important are fast lenses like f2.8 across the range of lens. ? Remember I said I wanted to be able to shoot at higher ISO and in low light ? How important is it to have lenses that cover the wide angles from 8mm to 16 or 20mm.
What focal length lens do you find you most use everyday?
I’d love your input here ...especially from you people that have been through this and have the benefit of experience and hindsight…now with hindsight what would you buy?
Blow the whole $2100 bucks on one good lens.? Maybe I should just buy the standard normal 50mm lens and start my learning experience there.? And work it out for myself as I go. Only trouble with that is I’d probably spend the rest of the money on beer and fishing tackle.
With no knowledge and just the internet as research tool, I came up with a three options what do you think.?

Option 1
Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II $ 96.00
Going to be my cheap but adequate portrait lens.

Canon EF-S 15-85 mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM $ 700.00
Fairly good reviews and drops to 15mm and reportedly better than most offered kit lenses
Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-5.6 SP VC USD $ 558.00
Good review Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 SP Di VC USD (EOS) - APS-C Format Review / Lab Test

Total for Option 1 = $1354.00
Thoughts: Worried that I don’t have any fast lens in there for low light apart from 50mm f1.8.
==============================================

Option 2 (Don’t worry about wider than 24mm for now)
Canon 50mm f1.8 II $ 96.00
Canon 24-70mm f2.8 L IS USM $1329.00 “L” lens suspect will use most
Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-5.6 SP VC USD $ 558.00 Good review Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 SP Di VC USD (EOS) - APS-C Format Review / Lab Test

Total for option 2 = $1983.00
----------------------------------------------------------------

Option 3

Canon 17-50mm f2.8 IS USM $ 980.00 Good revs and fast enough
Canon 50mm f1.8 II $ 96.00 cheap but adequate portrait lens
Canon EF 85mm f1.8 USM $ 383.00 Very good review Fast mid range
Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-5.6 SP VC USD $ 558.00 Good reviews

Total of Option 3 = $2017.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------
OR IF I WAS ABLE TO SELL ONE OF THE GRAND KIDS AND HANDLE THE DIVORCE PERHAPS I COULD RAISE ANOTHER $1000.00 If so ...Would it be worth going

Option : Live ostracized from rest of family
Canon 50mm f1.8 II $ 96.00 cheap adequate portrait lens
Canon 24-70mm f2.8 L IS USM $1329.00 “L” lens suspect use this most
Canon 70 -300 mm f4-5.6 L IS USM $1540.00 “L” lens

Total live in dog kennel option = $ 2965.00
BUT With this live on my own for rest of my life option --all three lenses could be used on a Canon EF full frame camera I could by in future with money I save not having a missus

What would you buy?

 

[enzodm]

Tamron 17-50 2.8 for 450$? Anyway, I'm not able to answer on the whole because it is out of my budget capabilities

 

[tomhooper]

Actually the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro either L or not is a great, sharp, lens. It can double as a portrait lens and won't break your budget.

Add an 18-55 kit type lens and you have the lower range covered for $1000.00 USD or less. Then spend the other money on a high quality long lens. Maybe something like the 300mm f/4 L IS.

 

[KKJUN]

Option 2 sound good to me, if you are sure you don't want to go wider than 24mm. Investing money in an L-lens is probably a wise choice.

Somewhat related and amusing video:

 

[jake337]

tokina 11-16 f2.8 = $5-600
50 f1.8 = super cheap
tokina 100mm f2.8 macro = $350 used
sigma 50-500 f4 = $5-700

not sure of a different super telphoto for cheaper.

If you add another 1k to your budget then I would opt for a used 300mm or 400mm f2.8 prime over the sigma

 

[mikehaugen]

For just slightly more (if you are ok with used), I see 100-400 f4.0-5.6 L for around 1200-1300 used, then maybe go with 24-105 f4 for around 1000. I know they aren't as fast as you are looking to get and of course one would be used, but it's another option. I personally am not too concerned about buying used- especially an "L" lens because people that spend this kind of money usually take care of them. Also it is USUALLY pretty obvious when something is wrong with it if you bring your camera and test it out. Just another option that would give you another 100mm, you'd have 2 "L" lenses, and you would only have 3 lenses (instead of the 4 you had in some of your options) to carry around with all of your travelling, not to mention they are a bit smaller than a couple of the other lenses mentioned here.

Also, I know that some very critical people are not that thrilled with the 100-400 lens, that is probably why from what I can tell has one of the lowest relative resale values of the "L" lenses. That is why I suggested getting that one used- it is going to save you more money than buying most other used lenses as "L" lenses really hold their value and doesn't usually make sense to buy used.

Of course these prices mentioned are in USD.

 

[subscuck]

Some things to consider about the 50 1.8. People rave about this lens because it's usually their first prime ever. While I've owned it, and will admit it's an outstanding value, it has some drawbacks that make the more expensve 1.4 worth considering, especially given your budget. The 1.8's AF in low light is very hit or miss, and often it will hunt and hunt and never lock on. The 1.4 has much better, faster, and more reliable AF in low light. The 1.8 is very loud and clunky sounding when it AFs, to the point where it almost sounds like it's broken. If you're trying to keep a low profile while shooting, this lens screams "here I am" loud and proud. The 1.4 has faster and much quieter AF. In your hand, the 1.8 feels like something you won at an arcade, cheap, light and very plastic. The build quality of the 1.4 is very good. IQ of the 1.4 is also better, as is the bokeh.

I see your option 1 as being pretty good overall for a starting kit, but I would substitute the 1.4 for the 1.8. You'll still come in well under $2k. You could also consider the Canon 70-300 IS (non DO version) which is around $500 US. Remember also that these 3.5-5.6 zooms may not be fast, but they have IS (or VC, OS, whatever) and that alows you to cheat in low light by using slower shutter speeds for hand held than you normally would. Just be aware that IS won't stop action at those shutter speeds. Fast SS is the only thing that stops action.

 

[jake337]

You may get the itch...Another option may be to buy 2 L lenses and buy the third next year.

50 f1.2L (portraits)
canon 300 f4L + teleconverters(portraits &wildlife)

save for a 24 f1.4L and 85 f1.2L next year!!!

 

[subscuck]

I was crunched for time earlier, so I didn't post everything I wanted to. Here's the rest. A lot of people have already suggested L lenses, and that's well and all, but it will max out your budget fast. You may want to consider leaving a little of that $2K for a speed light and possibly a tripod/head. It's easy to get caught up in spending big on bodies and lenses and a few weeks down the road you realize the extreme limitations of the pop-up flash, and realize there are certain shots you want that will require a tripod. At that point you've shot your wad on a body and lenses, and a speed light or tripod has to wait longer than you may want to. For married's, good luck convincing your spouse to let you spend another $250 on a speed light or tripod so soon after dropping $3K on gear. I would suggest getting it all up front and save for another lens down the road. Canon and third party manufacturers make many lenses that are close to L quality, but at a steep discount. The Canon 85 1.8 is often referred to as "L like" and the Sigma 50mm 1.4 reviews better overall than the Canon 50 1.2L. The 85 1.8 is about $400 while the 1.2 L is $2K. The Sigma 50 1.4 is about $500 versus the Canon 1.2 L at about $1500. You do have options in great non L glass.

 

[Derrel]

Option 3.

 

[table1349]

Option 4
Tamron 17-50 2.8 for 450$ Great revs and fast enough (Do you really need IS at that focal range?)
Canon 50mm f1.4 $ 399.00 good portrait lens
Canon EF 85mm f1.8 USM $ 383.00 Very good review Fast mid range
Canon 70-200 f4. $666.99 and shoots rings around the 70-300 in terms of image quality.

Total $1,898.99