Buying a 70D body this week. Any lens suggestions would be VERY helpful.

[aholeinthewor1d]

I know a lot of people debate about getting a camera with a kit lens or getting the body and then a better lens. I am not asking about that. The deal I am getting through Adorama is for the body only so I have to get a separate lens. For right now I just want the best possible "general" lens I can get for a decent price. So I am considering getting the normal 18-55 STM lens that would normally come with the kit but I wanted some opinions about if there was anything better for the price or around the price. This is canons rebate form with some lenses and I would also consider 3rd party lens suggestions. http://www.adorama.com/pdfs/rebates/Canon_MIR_Nov_2014.pdf

If you had to get the body only please let me know what you would get for a general lens. If there is something similar to the kit lens price (or a little higher) that is better I would like to get that. Thank you!!

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ScottyP wrote:
Mrz:

I would recommend a 24-xx lens OR a 17-55. Not both. They are too similar to get both.

You are correct that the 17-55 won't work on ff like a 5d3. I have a 17-55 I love but never use because I went to full frame. If you feel sure you will make the switch perhaps you should start with all full frame lenses, or at least buy a used 17-55 so you can sell it for what you paid for it.

---

It's worth remembering that a switch to FF doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing thing. I have one FF camera (a 5D3); and when I do 2-camera events, I use the 17-55 on a 7D and a 70-200 on the 5D3. Since 55 mm on the 7D has the equivalent reach of 88 mm in FF, the lenses overlap, but not by very much. So the two setups work well together.

[mrz1342]

hi Robert, regarding macro and portrait shooting, since 100mm f2.8 macro is good for macro as well as portrait, why some of pro photographers prefer 50 or 85mm f1.4 and 1.8? just because of focal rang? or other technical reasons?

[ebiggs1]

I'm done. 

[mrz1342]

If because of my stupid question, no worries, breath deeply and try me agin! I'm a good student 🙂

[ebiggs1]

No, you are not.  You have been advised on several different threads about the very same issue.   Yet you still ask the same questions about the same equipment.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@mrz1342 wrote:
If because of my stupid question, no worries, breath deeply and try me agin! I'm a good student 🙂

---

No, I've had it too. It's not that you ask stupid questions, though I'm sometimes tempted to agree with that characterization. It's that you pay no attention to the answers we give you, no matter how many times we repeat them. The conversations in this forum assume a basic understanding of at least the elementary concepts of photography. You appear not to have that understanding, nor do you seem willing to do the necessary reading and experimenting that would help you catch up. Continuing the discussion under those circumstances is a waste of your time and ours.

[mrz1342]

hi, pls dont shout at me and dont be angry with me 😞 

i am going to buy a caonon 24-105 f4 based on your recomendation as said: "The EF 24-105mm f4 L is the best buy in the Canon line" (even on APS-C cameras like my 70d). its relly gives me stunning sharpness!

but since i am shooting indoor also, this lens on my 70d will be: 38.4-106mm f6.4 shall i chose other lense like 50mm 1.4 or else? 

or i should trust something like Tamron 16-300 made for APS-C as all-in-one (With less sharpness)?

please advice me

kind regards

[TCampbell]

When you change the crop factor of the camera (using an APS-C body instead of a full-frame body), nothing about the lens changes.  It is STILL a 24-105mm f/4 lens.

The "angle of view" becomes more restricted due to the smaller size sensor.  That makes it rougly the equivalent of what you'd see IF you owned a full-frame camera AND you hypothetically owned zoom lens that could provide a 38-168mm zoom range... it would STILL be f/4 (because the lens really is an f/4 lens).

The only time you multiply the f-stop is when using a teleconverter (e.g. if using a 1.4x or a 2x teleconverter you lose 1 stop (with 1.4x) or 2 stops (2x) respectively.  But this isn't a teleconverter... it's just a crop-body.  A teleconverter actually DOES make the lens "longer" and alters the focal LENGTH and since the true focal length changed but the diamter did not then it means it implicitly also changes the focal RATIO.  That's why you multipley the f-stop by the teleconverter factor to arrive at the new f-stop.   But as there is no teleconverter in use, the focal length and focal ratio does not actually change... only the angle-of-view changes due to the crop-factor of the sensor.

Lenses with more ambitious zoom ranges (super-zooms... such as the Tamron you mention) have to make sacrifices and one of those sacrifices is typically image quality.  

Tests on the Tamron seem to indicate that it's "sharp" (although it has visible barrel distortion and pincushion distortion) at the short focal lengths.  But beyond 100mm (most of it's range) it's merely "average".  Most all-in-one zooms have similar issues.

It's sort of tragic to buy a camera body which was designed to allow you to swap lenses (so you can use the best lens for the job) and then buy an all-in-one lens so that you never have to change lenses.  The image quality drops and, at that point, you may as well not have bought such a nice camera.

it's not that super-zooms have no place.  They're fine for snaps & memento photos, but I wouldn't use one for any serious work.  If you were going on a trip and could ONLY pack one lens... a super-zoom has it's benefits.  But if I'm in a  situation where I'm not constrained as to which lens I can use... I'd much rather use the 24-105mm.  

[ebiggs1]

"If you were going on a trip and could ONLY pack one lens... "

Like that would ever happen!    You mean it does to some people?  

[mrz1342]

DEAR ebiggs1

with all respect, dont u want to reply my question?