Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Final lenses for 20D

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 5:26:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

After several months of research, posting and reading here, I've
finally decided about the three lenses to get with my 20D. I've
decided not go with any of the kit lenses and stay with "L" lenses
when possible. This will position me for moving up to the full frame
Canon when ever a cheaper on comes out or I get to needing one. The
lenses are the EF 17-40 F/4.0L, EF 70-200mm f/4.0L and for low light a
EF 50mm f/1.4.

Since the majority of my work now is photographing tombstones and
burial plots (for a book on historical graves), the 17-40 (crop of
27-64) should work fine as my daily use lens. The 50mm for indoors
without flash and the 70-200 for some nature and aircraft photos. All
this with the body comes in at just under 3K from B&H.

Later I'll add the 35mm F/1.4L and might break the no EF-S rule with
an EF-S 17-70 IS. Plus I'll keep on the look out for the EF F1.0 just
because.

These with my new iMac and R800 printer should set me up well for some
quality photo work.


********************************************************

"The condition of civil affairs in Texas is anomalous,
singular, and unsatisfactory."

Maj. Gen. Philip H. Sherdan
to
Bvt. Maj. Gen. John A. Rawlins
November 14, 1866

More about : final lenses 20d

February 26, 2005 8:13:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ihu021tv92ea8jkm97h0q4vc8d77vjitom@4ax.com...
> After several months of research, posting and reading here, I've
> finally decided about the three lenses to get with my 20D. I've
> decided not go with any of the kit lenses and stay with "L" lenses
> when possible. This will position me for moving up to the full frame
> Canon when ever a cheaper on comes out or I get to needing one. The
> lenses are the EF 17-40 F/4.0L, EF 70-200mm f/4.0L and for low light a
> EF 50mm f/1.4.
>
> Since the majority of my work now is photographing tombstones and
> burial plots (for a book on historical graves), the 17-40 (crop of
> 27-64) should work fine as my daily use lens. The 50mm for indoors
> without flash and the 70-200 for some nature and aircraft photos. All
> this with the body comes in at just under 3K from B&H.
>

Sounds good to me, worth considering the 1.4x extender for the 70-200 for
nature etc to give you that extra reach ?, and the AF should still work.
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 9:56:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 17:13:30 -0000, "dylan" <no@nospam.com> wrote:

>
>"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:ihu021tv92ea8jkm97h0q4vc8d77vjitom@4ax.com...
>> After several months of research, posting and reading here, I've
>> finally decided about the three lenses to get with my 20D. I've
>> decided not go with any of the kit lenses and stay with "L" lenses
>> when possible. This will position me for moving up to the full frame
>> Canon when ever a cheaper on comes out or I get to needing one. The
>> lenses are the EF 17-40 F/4.0L, EF 70-200mm f/4.0L and for low light a
>> EF 50mm f/1.4.
>>
>> Since the majority of my work now is photographing tombstones and
>> burial plots (for a book on historical graves), the 17-40 (crop of
>> 27-64) should work fine as my daily use lens. The 50mm for indoors
>> without flash and the 70-200 for some nature and aircraft photos. All
>> this with the body comes in at just under 3K from B&H.
>>
>
>Sounds good to me, worth considering the 1.4x extender for the 70-200 for
>nature etc to give you that extra reach ?, and the AF should still work.

That's down the road but I've heard various opinions on the AF working
with the extender (at least the 2X) on the 70-200 in another thread
here, "Canon 2X telextender on EF 70-200 with 20D?"


********************************************************

"The condition of civil affairs in Texas is anomalous,
singular, and unsatisfactory."

Maj. Gen. Philip H. Sherdan
to
Bvt. Maj. Gen. John A. Rawlins
November 14, 1866
Related resources
February 26, 2005 9:56:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John A. Stovall wrote:

>>Sounds good to me, worth considering the 1.4x extender for the 70-200 for
>>nature etc to give you that extra reach ?, and the AF should still work.
>
>That's down the road but I've heard various opinions on the AF working
>with the extender (at least the 2X) on the 70-200 in another thread
>here, "Canon 2X telextender on EF 70-200 with 20D?"

That's why Dylan mentioned the 1.4x extender. On an f/4 lense it will
still be within the AF sensor range at f/5.6 and should work fine.

Even so, the 2.0x extender will still produce reasonably adequate
quality on that lense. You simply have to focus it yourself...not a hard
process unless you're shooting sports. :) 
Anonymous
February 27, 2005 3:53:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 17:39:53 -0500, Bill <bill@c.a> wrote:

>John A. Stovall wrote:
>
>>>Sounds good to me, worth considering the 1.4x extender for the 70-200 for
>>>nature etc to give you that extra reach ?, and the AF should still work.
>>
>>That's down the road but I've heard various opinions on the AF working
>>with the extender (at least the 2X) on the 70-200 in another thread
>>here, "Canon 2X telextender on EF 70-200 with 20D?"
>
>That's why Dylan mentioned the 1.4x extender. On an f/4 lense it will
>still be within the AF sensor range at f/5.6 and should work fine.
>
>Even so, the 2.0x extender will still produce reasonably adequate
>quality on that lense. You simply have to focus it yourself...not a hard
>process unless you're shooting sports. :) 

Not even that hard I used an Ziess 250 F4.0 manual focus Sonnar for
years on a Contarex at sports car races. The only thing to me about
manual focus with digitals is the lack of good focusing screens.

Glad to know that the 1.4x will work though with the AF.


********************************************************

"A nice man is a man of nasty ideas."

_Introductions to History of the Reformation_
Jonathan Swift
1667-1745
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 2:13:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John A. Stovall wrote:
> lenses are the EF 17-40 F/4.0L, EF 70-200mm f/4.0L and for low light
a
> EF 50mm f/1.4.
>
> All this with the body comes in at just under 3K from B&H.
>
> Later I'll add the 35mm F/1.4L

My 3 lenses are 50/1.8, 200/2.8, and 20/2.8. With Canon triple rebates,
the total cost of the 3 lenses plus a 300D is below $1500. The 4th lens
is a 2x.
March 5, 2005 6:23:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John,

Having got the 70-200 f2.8 L IS I can confirm that both the 1.4x & 2x
extenders both operate with full autofocus functionality. The crucial bit is
the combined f value - this has to be 5.6 or less for the autofocus to work.

On the f/4.0L you are therefore fine using the 1.4x extender but would not
be able to use the 2x.

Regards

DM

"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bch121lrbqnq7eo4n0b2g43cnisd3t8gjr@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 17:13:30 -0000, "dylan" <no@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>news:ihu021tv92ea8jkm97h0q4vc8d77vjitom@4ax.com...
>>> After several months of research, posting and reading here, I've
>>> finally decided about the three lenses to get with my 20D. I've
>>> decided not go with any of the kit lenses and stay with "L" lenses
>>> when possible. This will position me for moving up to the full frame
>>> Canon when ever a cheaper on comes out or I get to needing one. The
>>> lenses are the EF 17-40 F/4.0L, EF 70-200mm f/4.0L and for low light a
>>> EF 50mm f/1.4.
>>>
>>> Since the majority of my work now is photographing tombstones and
>>> burial plots (for a book on historical graves), the 17-40 (crop of
>>> 27-64) should work fine as my daily use lens. The 50mm for indoors
>>> without flash and the 70-200 for some nature and aircraft photos. All
>>> this with the body comes in at just under 3K from B&H.
>>>
>>
>>Sounds good to me, worth considering the 1.4x extender for the 70-200 for
>>nature etc to give you that extra reach ?, and the AF should still work.
>
> That's down the road but I've heard various opinions on the AF working
> with the extender (at least the 2X) on the 70-200 in another thread
> here, "Canon 2X telextender on EF 70-200 with 20D?"
>
>
> ********************************************************
>
> "The condition of civil affairs in Texas is anomalous,
> singular, and unsatisfactory."
>
> Maj. Gen. Philip H. Sherdan
> to
> Bvt. Maj. Gen. John A. Rawlins
> November 14, 1866
!