Nick32

Just some background.
I got into photography about 3 and a half years ago. First nice camera i bought was a canon 350D (rebel xt). I shot with that with the canon 18-55 lens. canon 50mm 1.8 and a tamron 75-300 cheap zoom lens.
After getting more interested in photography and wanted to step things up a little i recently (2 months ago) bought the new Canon 50D. I got the 28-135 lens that came with it. and still have the canon 50mm and tamron 75-300.

As of right now I am currently looking to invest a little bit of money into some nice new glass for the 50d.
Im pretty sure I want an L lens since ive heard so many good things about them. but cant really justify spending $1500+ on a lens after i just spent 1600 on a camera.

I am leaning towards the Canon 24-105 f/4L
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/3976..._4L_IS_USM.html

would anyone else suggest something better in this price range (under $1000)

I was also thinking about selling the canon 28-135, since it is mighty close to the 24-105 that im looking at. and also selling the tamron 75-300. And would invest in a nice zoom lens with IS in the future

let me know your thoughts! should be going to pick up the new lens by next week.

Thanks alot
Nick

bkw

24-70L because it's quicker.. but if youre not going to use the lens indoors, then the 24-105L is terrific.

But be warned. L lenses are very addictive. My first L was the 24-105L, and since then I've gone thru a dozen or so other L's. Like you I thought dropping $1500 on a piece of glass was unhead of. Then came the 70-200 f/2.8L IS and the 85L. BUT, if youre going to spend money on this hobby, better to spend it on lenses than bodies since the price of bodies depreciate much more quickly than lenses do.

Nick32

thank you, i will look into the 24-70, ill most deffinitly be using this lens indoors as well so this route might be better

Nick32

I know im going to be selling the tamron 75-300 cause i really have no use for it, but do you think i should sell the 28-135 and eventually replace it with L glass?

wills2k106

I was also looking to get rid of my cheap glass and upgrade to some L stuff.

I was torn between the 24-70 and the 24-105. Some say the difference between the speed in the two is made up by the IS in the 24-105 but I don't really buy it.

My second lens was 70-200, either f2.8 or f4. If I decide I want the extra reach I would get the f2.8 and the 1.4 extender, because you lose a stop with the extender I think. The f4 however is only $580.

You seem to be in the same boat as me.

Borbor

If full frame (or 1 series) is not in your near future, get the 17-55 2.8

If full frame is in your near future; get the 24-70

24-70 on a 1.6x crop isn't really all that wide on the wide end of things, just so you know.

Nick32

ya the 70-200 looks like a good deal for the price, but im looking for more of a walk around lens right now for ever day use and i thing the 70-200 would be a little much for that. Also isnt the 70-200 f/4L with IS over $1000? even though the one without IS is only 580

nfty

Keep the 28-135mm, but a "wider" (1.6x FTMFL) L.

Another +1 for the 24-70.

wills2k106

I think the 70-200 f/4 IS is just under $1000 now with the Canon rebates. I would primarily be using it for racing, and most of the people have talked to say that image stabilization doesn't help much, if at all, for motorsports. My current non-IS lenses aren't blurry on panning shots so I see no need to spend the extra coin.

Any thoughts on the back focusing and sharpness issues that they had on the 24-70? Have they been resolved?

sevenrd

I purchased a 50D a couple of months back and got my first L lens last week: the 24-70. I was debating between it and the 24-105 and decided on the 24-70 for its faster speed and the fact that I'll likely be getting a 70-200 in the future - which will cover a nice range without overlap. And finally, I figure eventually I'll go FF so I don't want to put money into EF-S lenses (17-55).

As far as the QC issues with the 24-70L, I've read about them too. I've only had the lens a short while but it appears very sharp to my eyes. And I haven't noticed any back focusing either. But again, I haven't had it long enough to really put it through its paces. Regardless, people who have issues with the lens generally seem to get them resolved with a calibration from Canon.

As warned before, L's can become addicting. It's only been a week since my first and I'm already thinking about the next.