Bit of help needed choosing lenses for Canon 500D

[stompboxx]

Was hoping I could get a bit of advice on selecting some lenses for my Canon 500D.

Ideally, I want to be able a vast range of scenarios (portraits, macro, landscapes...and a few of the motor of course) with no more than 3 lenses. Ideally they would all be small enough to fit comfortably in a regular size camera bag, and not be hideously hideously expensive.

I'm looking at having the following three:

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 - have this currently. Seems plenty good enough for the amateur portrait photographer?

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 - this would be a bit of outlay, but would be my regular all round lens. Would this be a good choice for that?

Canon EF 100 mm F/2.8 - for use as a macro lens. Seems to be relatively good value for money?


What do you think of those choices? Would these cover off most of the bases, or is there something I am missing here?

Thanks for your help, been stuck for ages choosing what to get!!

[RobDickinson]

Yep.

17-55 is very versatile, can do great landscapes, portraits etc.

50/1.4 you know about

100 macro is really good for portraits also. Possibly up to some near sports/motorsports tho perhaps not quite quick enough af?

You could always look at extension tubes for the 50 as a cheap way to do macro and buy a 70-200 instead of the 100?

[Zaxxon]

Carefull with the 17-55 2.8. Mine sucks dust like a Dyson, it's been sent back and cleaned and now has another 2 pieces of dust inside.
I'm a bit dissapointed for a high class lens to be honest. Good images though.

[RobDickinson]

Yeah mine has a bit of dust, just ignore it.

[stompboxx]

RobDickinson said:

Yep.

17-55 is very versatile, can do great landscapes, portraits etc.

50/1.4 you know about

100 macro is really good for portraits also. Possibly up to some near sports/motorsports tho perhaps not quite quick enough af?

You could always look at extension tubes for the 50 as a cheap way to do macro and buy a 70-200 instead of the 100?

Thanks for that suggestion, I will check it out...only thing is the 70-200 is absolutely colossal!!

[RobDickinson]

Look at the 70-200f4L, its not so big (compare to the 2.8's!).

I would suggest the new 70-300L but I suspect thats quite pricey in the UK still.

Also think about the sigma 50-150f2.8, cracking little lens.

I do often go out/on holiday with just the 17-55 and my tamron 90f2.8 macro, makes a very versatile combo.

[xrrr]

+1 on the 17-55. Bloody fantastic lens used it for 80% of my images. Mine had some dust in it when I sold it (I went full frame) but only noticed when I was inspecting it for ebay - it didn't make any difference to the pictures that I could tell - at least up to f/16 anyway and by then some dust on the front of the lens (never mind inside it) starts to show up!

[Simpo Two]

Do you really need f1.4?

How about:

17-55mm f2.8 - regular all round lens.

60mm f2.8 macro - for use as a macro lens AND portrait (so you don't need a 50mm)

70-300 (or 70-200 if you need speed) - for things further away.

That's most stuff covered I think.

[thewildblue]

With my 500D I went 70-300USM non L, 17-40L and nifty fifty. I still had the kit lens as well. To be honest the 17-40 lived on it most of the time and was superb.

[Killwilly]

Don't forget the 55-250, for the money it's pretty good.


132 by killwilly, on Flickr

[Steve Evil]

My favourite lens on my 350d is the Sigma 10-20. Managed to bag one at a bargain price and it rarely leaves my camera when I'm on holiday.