Seeking lens advice

Thank you so much! That is actually quite helpful in making my
decision and in my overall learning. I'm vaguely aware of the focal
length multiplier. I read it's definition but haven't found (or even
looked for) a practical example of how it's used. Therefore, I did not
take that into account. That makes me confident that if I buy the lens
I won't be wasting my money (or at least it's worth giving a shot).

Thanks again,
Shannon
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice 

Thanks for the reply, Tom! The wide angles on those are impressive.
How impressed have you been with it? Also, what do you use for viewing
CR2 files? I assume Photoshop but I don't have a copy of that. I tried
a free program that installs a Windows shell extension so you can view
it as a thumbnail, but I can't open it full size.

Thanks again,
Shannon
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice 

"Shannon Cayze" <cayze DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193080352.061922.152890@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> Hello all,
>
> I'm brand new to SLR photography. In fact, I haven't even bought any
> equipment yet, but I'm doing all the research now. I'm very confident
> that I'm going to buy the Canon Rebel XTi body, and I'm about 50%
> confident that I'm going to buy the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
> lens (I'm debating between that and the more expensive Canon EF
> 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM). My question is that if I buy the 17-85mm lens,
> what real benefit would I get from buying the Canon 10-22mm ultra wide-
> angle lens? I want to take a lot of landscape shots and only want to
> invest in the additional lens if it's really going to make a
> difference. Also, any other advice on what I should be considering
> would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Shannon
>

I will be posting some raw and sraw pics taken with my 10-22 lens on my web
site later today.

www.takebetterpix.com

Tom
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice 

"Shannon Cayze" <cayze.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193080352.061922.152890@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> Hello all,
>
> I'm brand new to SLR photography. In fact, I haven't even bought any
> equipment yet, but I'm doing all the research now. I'm very confident
> that I'm going to buy the Canon Rebel XTi body, and I'm about 50%
> confident that I'm going to buy the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
> lens (I'm debating between that and the more expensive Canon EF
> 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM). My question is that if I buy the 17-85mm lens,
> what real benefit would I get from buying the Canon 10-22mm ultra wide-
> angle lens? I want to take a lot of landscape shots and only want to
> invest in the additional lens if it's really going to make a
> difference. Also, any other advice on what I should be considering
> would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Shannon
>

if you want to see pictures taken with the 10-22mm i posted some raw files
on the link below.

http://www.takebetterpix.com/pictures.html

Tom
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice 

"Shannon Cayze" <cayze DeleteThis @hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:1193080352.061922.152890@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> Hello all,
>
> I'm brand new to SLR photography. In fact, I haven't even bought any
> equipment yet, but I'm doing all the research now. I'm very confident
> that I'm going to buy the Canon Rebel XTi body, and I'm about 50%
> confident that I'm going to buy the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
> lens (I'm debating between that and the more expensive Canon EF
> 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM). My question is that if I buy the 17-85mm lens,
> what real benefit would I get from buying the Canon 10-22mm ultra wide-
> angle lens? I want to take a lot of landscape shots and only want to
> invest in the additional lens if it's really going to make a
> difference. Also, any other advice on what I should be considering
> would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Shannon

L glass is worth every penny. I have a friend with the 17-85 and I have the
24-105, it is easy to see which lens took which picture. The only drawbacks
to the 24-105 is it's size and obviously it's price. If you don't need the
long reach, the 17-40 f4 L is a better match to the smaller XTi. If you
don't need the wider angle of the 17-40, the 24-105 does an acceptable job
and nothing stops you from stitching two or three shots together to make a
panoramic shot.

On a recent trip, my wife used a 17-40 on her Xti and I used a 24-105 on a
20D. Only a few times did I wish for more of a wide angle, but the pictures
I took and stitched looked great. On the other hand, the longer reach of
the 24-105 and the IS were more useful to me.

Buying cheap is not always a good move, you may spend more when you do get
the best product in the end.

Jean
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice 

Shannon Cayze wrote:
> Thank you so much! That is actually quite helpful in making my
> decision and in my overall learning. I'm vaguely aware of the focal
> length multiplier. I read it's definition but haven't found (or even
> looked for) a practical example of how it's used. Therefore, I did not
> take that into account. That makes me confident that if I buy the lens
> I won't be wasting my money (or at least it's worth giving a shot).
>
Stop this myth, you are cropping! You aren't multiplying the focal
length. If I had a 1.5X teleconverter (presuming they existed) and
mounted on a 50mm lens on a 24x36mm film or dSLR I would have a 150mm
lens. If I mount a 50mm on a APS-C sensor like a Nikon D80 etc, I would
only have a 50mm lens, but the field-of-view would be cropped. If I put
the same 50mm lens on a 35mm SLR and looked at the same scene from the
same vantage point the perspective would be the same. Shoot print the
dSLR to 5x8, print the 35mm to 8x12, and cut a 5x8 from the center of
the 8x12, and then shot the exact same thing with a 100mm on the 35
print that at 5x8 it will have a different perspective than the other
two examples.

You are cropping not multiplying...
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice 

On Oct 23, 12:18 am, "jean" <try... RemoveThis @find.it> wrote:
> "Shannon Cayze" <ca... RemoveThis @hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message denews:1193080352.061922.152890@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hello all,
>
> > I'm brand new to SLR photography. In fact, I haven't even bought any
> > equipment yet, but I'm doing all the research now. I'm very confident
> > that I'm going to buy the Canon Rebel XTi body, and I'm about 50%
> > confident that I'm going to buy the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
> > lens (I'm debating between that and the more expensive Canon EF
> > 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM). My question is that if I buy the 17-85mm lens,
> > what real benefit would I get from buying the Canon 10-22mm ultra wide-
> > angle lens? I want to take a lot of landscape shots and only want to
> > invest in the additional lens if it's really going to make a
> > difference. Also, any other advice on what I should be considering
> > would be greatly appreciated.
>
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Shannon
>
> L glass is worth every penny. I have a friend with the 17-85 and I have the
> 24-105, it is easy to see which lens took which picture. The only drawbacks
> to the 24-105 is it's size and obviously it's price. If you don't need the
> long reach, the 17-40 f4 L is a better match to the smaller XTi. If you
> don't need the wider angle of the 17-40, the 24-105 does an acceptable job
> and nothing stops you from stitching two or three shots together to make a
> panoramic shot.
>
> On a recent trip, my wife used a 17-40 on her Xti and I used a 24-105 on a
> 20D. Only a few times did I wish for more of a wide angle, but the pictures
> I took and stitched looked great. On the other hand, the longer reach of
> the 24-105 and the IS were more useful to me.
>
> Buying cheap is not always a good move, you may spend more when you do get
> the best product in the end.
>
> Jean- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Thanks for the input Jean. I completely agree, as I am always willing
to spend a little more to get something I want. I'm just weighing a
lot of decisions regarding the lenses (because I'm planning to buy up
to five) and hoping that the 17-85 will be enough for me. Clearly, my
cart total is skyrocketing! Therefore, I keep flip-flopping between
the 17-85 and the 24-105. I also have a little voice in my head that
tells me whichever one I pick will be my primary lens, and I should
invest more in it to get the best quality. Here are the lenses I'm
considering getting (all Canon brand):

100mm macro
10-22mm ultra wide-angle
17-85mm IS or 24-105mm IS standard zoom
70-300mm IS telephoto
50mm f1.8 prime lens (only because it's cheap, has a wide aperture,
and is highly recommended by customers on Amazon)

How do you feel about this list? Are any of them unnecessary or not
very useful? In my mind I can imagine different scenarios where each
would be useful, but like I said, I have no experience.

Thanks again,
Shannon
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice 

Thanks, Tony! That's very helpful because I'd hate to make a decision
I regret.

Shannon
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice 

"David J. Littleboy" <davidjl.RemoveThis@gol.com> wrote:

> My 65/4.0 on my Mamiya 7 acts exactly the same as the 55/2.8 on my Mamiya
> 645, which acts exactly the same as a 35mm lens on my 5D, which acts
> exactly the same as a 22mm lens on my 300D.
>
> They really do.
>
> David J. Littleboy
> Tokyo, Japan
>

They really don't, if you take d.o.f. in consideration!
/per
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice 

"jean" <try_to DeleteThis @find.it> wrote:
> L glass is worth every penny.
>
> Jean

And still, some of the sharpest and best Canon lenses are not "L" specified!
The 50/1.4 for example!
/per
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice 

per wrote:
> "David J. Littleboy" <davidjl DeleteThis @gol.com> wrote:
>
>> My 65/4.0 on my Mamiya 7 acts exactly the same as the 55/2.8 on my Mamiya
>> 645, which acts exactly the same as a 35mm lens on my 5D, which acts
>> exactly the same as a 22mm lens on my 300D.
>>
>> They really do.
>>
>> David J. Littleboy
>> Tokyo, Japan
>>
>
> They really don't, if you take d.o.f. in consideration!
> /per
>
>
>
Would you mind expanding on that a bit? I understand the basics on DOF
and lens/sensor, but that's about it.

Thks!
p.
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice 

"Shannon Cayze" <cayze.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193104412.970403.182930@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> Thanks for the reply, Tom! The wide angles on those are impressive.
> How impressed have you been with it? Also, what do you use for viewing
> CR2 files? I assume Photoshop but I don't have a copy of that. I tried
> a free program that installs a Windows shell extension so you can view
> it as a thumbnail, but I can't open it full size.
>
> Thanks again,
> Shannon
>

You are welcome and glad to see someone actually looked at them .

Well my talking about how much I like anything in a camera is worth only
conversation.
I wouldn't suggest you go out and buy anything based on what I say. This is
my first DSLR
and this is the first camera that I have been shooting in Raw.

Those were actually my first outside pictures with this camera and lens.
and don't judge the 40d or the lens by the pictures I take.

hmmm so you only were able to see my pics in thumb nails?
I have just upgraded from elements 4.0 to Photoshop CS3 and love it.
If your computer can handle it you can down load trial versions of Photoshop
CS3
and get to use it for 30 days. but I would suggest is first down loaded the
trial of Elements
and get used to the basics after 30 days experience then treat your self to
CS3.

there are a number of programs that you can down load for 30 days.
but if you cant or just don't want to go with a paid version than its
probably best
you start with a free version.
being you used the term " Windows Shell Extension" you probably know more
about computers than I do.
but can offer some help in MS Office, Dreamweaver and dare I say Photoshop.


Tom
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice 

"Pboud" <pboud_01NOSPAMAT.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:PFoTi.28341$G25.15731@edtnps89...
> per wrote:
> > "David J. Littleboy" <davidjl.RemoveThis@gol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> My 65/4.0 on my Mamiya 7 acts exactly the same as the 55/2.8 on my Mamiya
> >> 645, which acts exactly the same as a 35mm lens on my 5D, which acts
> >> exactly the same as a 22mm lens on my 300D.
> >>
> >> They really do.
> >>
> >> David J. Littleboy
> >> Tokyo, Japan
> >>
> >
> > They really don't, if you take d.o.f. in consideration!
> > /per
> >
> >
> >
> Would you mind expanding on that a bit? I understand the basics on DOF
> and lens/sensor, but that's about it.
>
> Thks!

Am I correct in assuming that reducing the aperture one f stop will equalize the DOF?
 >> Stay informed about: Seeking lens advice