Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

EOS 20d lense recommendations

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
May 12, 2005 3:09:03 PM

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

Contemplating purchasing EOS 20d but guess I need recommendations for
general use lenses (non-professional). I expect I'll mostly shoot
indoor family photos (perhaps as many as 10 people wide/picture) at
night and outside mid day picnic shots most of the time. For the
family photos, I guess I'd be about 10 to 12 feet away from the
subject but can't say for the outside shots. I'm looking for perhaps
middle quality (won't break me but don't want cheap lenses either).

Any opinion on the Canon 17-85mm ISUSM Lens that can come with the
camera purchase? I've read conflicting info where one liked it for
portraits but another said it showed distortion ???

Also will I need a flash for the indoor portraits? I've got a 7 year
old Sigma (???) flash that I used on a n6006 nikon but don't know how
it would work here. Are the canon flashes much better ?

thanks.
Anonymous
May 12, 2005 3:09:04 PM

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

The 17-85 is a very good mid-range (prosumer) lens with a touch of CA
in the corners. Any 5X zoom (85/17 = 5) will have distortion. From the
images I have seen, it can be easily ignored. Many people consider this
a $300 lens with a $300 IS package in a single assembly.

However, it is not as good as a 17-40 F/4 L USM, nor as good as the
24-70 F/2.8 L USM or 16-35 F/2.8 L USM. The real question is where do
you want your lens collection to be in 5 years. Figure this out, make a
plan and buy the lenses that fit on your plan; it is a lot less
expensive to just buy high end lenses than to buy midrange lenses and
upgrade later (ebay notwithstanding).

I have found that the 20D on camera flash is pretty tollerable,
especially if you dial up the ISO and feed it a little FEC (+1). I
don't use the flash a lot since dialing up the ISO and F/2.8 lenses in
my arsenal generally cover any reasonable home lighting situation;
howver, when called upon, I have had pretty good luck with the on
camera flash.
May 12, 2005 8:44:27 PM

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

In article <1115914897.784194.134530@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
<MitchAlsup@aol.com> wrote:

>However, it is not as good as a 17-40 F/4 L USM, nor as good as the
>24-70 F/2.8 L USM or 16-35 F/2.8 L USM. The real question is where do
>you want your lens collection to be in 5 years. Figure this out, make a
>plan and buy the lenses that fit on your plan; it is a lot less
>expensive to just buy high end lenses than to buy midrange lenses and
>upgrade later (ebay notwithstanding).

For some people, the time value of money tuns this formula on its head.
I won't regret having my Tamron Zoom after I've got the 2 other "L" primes
that I want plus an L/IS long zoom.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
May 12, 2005 8:45:28 PM

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

<Rob> wrote in message news:2uu68152hfepmp441gg380sa6gdopfbt9g@4ax.com...
> Contemplating purchasing EOS 20d but guess I need recommendations for
> general use lenses (non-professional). I expect I'll mostly shoot
> indoor family photos (perhaps as many as 10 people wide/picture) at
> night and outside mid day picnic shots most of the time. For the
> family photos, I guess I'd be about 10 to 12 feet away from the
> subject but can't say for the outside shots. I'm looking for perhaps
> middle quality (won't break me but don't want cheap lenses either).
>
> Any opinion on the Canon 17-85mm ISUSM Lens that can come with the
> camera purchase? I've read conflicting info where one liked it for
> portraits but another said it showed distortion ???
>
> Also will I need a flash for the indoor portraits? I've got a 7 year
> old Sigma (???) flash that I used on a n6006 nikon but don't know how
> it would work here. Are the canon flashes much better ?
>
> thanks.

The 17-85 IS USM is highly recommended at DPReview. I bought a 20D with the
18-55mm kit lens and found it (the lens, not the camera, which I love) to be
disappointing. The front element is very loose and wobbly and the lens has a
plastic camera mount. I have since found a 28-105mm USM second hand which I
am presently using (until I can afford the L-series lenses). It focuses
almost instantaneously and is reasonably sharp. At f3.5 you'll need flash
for indoors (or higher ISO speeds) to have reasonable shutter speed. I would
recommend the 28-105 USM unless you really need the WA coverage. The 17-85mm
seems to derive little benefit from IS, from what's been posted here.

HTH

Sonrise
Anonymous
May 12, 2005 9:41:21 PM

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

Rob wrote:
>
> Contemplating purchasing EOS 20d but guess I need recommendations for
> general use lenses (non-professional). I expect I'll mostly shoot
> indoor family photos (perhaps as many as 10 people wide/picture) at
> night and outside mid day picnic shots most of the time. For the
> family photos, I guess I'd be about 10 to 12 feet away from the
> subject but can't say for the outside shots. I'm looking for perhaps
> middle quality (won't break me but don't want cheap lenses either).
>
> Any opinion on the Canon 17-85mm ISUSM Lens that can come with the
> camera purchase? I've read conflicting info where one liked it for
> portraits but another said it showed distortion ???
>
> Also will I need a flash for the indoor portraits? I've got a 7 year
> old Sigma (???) flash that I used on a n6006 nikon but don't know how
> it would work here. Are the canon flashes much better ?
>
> thanks.


Hello
I tried one out yesterday. A lot of barrel distortion and green/magenta
aberation at the edges. The aberation is uncorrectable.
If you like I can supply a RAW. I might look at the 17-40 next.

Mike Engles
Anonymous
May 12, 2005 10:53:20 PM

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

On Thu, 12 May 2005 11:09:03 -0500, Rob wrote:

>Contemplating purchasing EOS 20d but guess I need recommendations for
>general use lenses (non-professional). I expect I'll mostly shoot
>indoor family photos (perhaps as many as 10 people wide/picture) at
>night and outside mid day picnic shots most of the time. For the
>family photos, I guess I'd be about 10 to 12 feet away from the
>subject but can't say for the outside shots. I'm looking for perhaps
>middle quality (won't break me but don't want cheap lenses either).

I would just buy the body and get the 17-40L.
*********************************************************

"I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated."

-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
Anonymous
May 12, 2005 10:53:21 PM

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

John A. Stovall wrote:

> On Thu, 12 May 2005 11:09:03 -0500, Rob wrote:
>
>
>>Contemplating purchasing EOS 20d but guess I need recommendations for
>>general use lenses (non-professional). I expect I'll mostly shoot
>>indoor family photos (perhaps as many as 10 people wide/picture) at
>>night and outside mid day picnic shots most of the time. For the
>>family photos, I guess I'd be about 10 to 12 feet away from the
>>subject but can't say for the outside shots. I'm looking for perhaps
>>middle quality (won't break me but don't want cheap lenses either).
>
>
> I would just buy the body and get the 17-40L.


Yeah, if you can afford a 20D, you probably can afford a better lens. I
don't know if that one goes to f/2.8 but that's what you want then don't
worry about flash or just use a touch of flash, with that camera you can
boost the ISO way up. A lot of older flashes have a dangerously high
trigger voltage that can damage the camera (so be careful) and you'll
need the latest spendy flash to get all the new features with metering.


--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
san francisco native plants
Anonymous
May 12, 2005 11:07:44 PM

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

Mike Engles wrote:
>
> Rob wrote:
> >
> > Contemplating purchasing EOS 20d but guess I need recommendations for
> > general use lenses (non-professional). I expect I'll mostly shoot
> > indoor family photos (perhaps as many as 10 people wide/picture) at
> > night and outside mid day picnic shots most of the time. For the
> > family photos, I guess I'd be about 10 to 12 feet away from the
> > subject but can't say for the outside shots. I'm looking for perhaps
> > middle quality (won't break me but don't want cheap lenses either).
> >
> > Any opinion on the Canon 17-85mm ISUSM Lens that can come with the
> > camera purchase? I've read conflicting info where one liked it for
> > portraits but another said it showed distortion ???
> >
> > Also will I need a flash for the indoor portraits? I've got a 7 year
> > old Sigma (???) flash that I used on a n6006 nikon but don't know how
> > it would work here. Are the canon flashes much better ?
> >
> > thanks.
>
> Hello
> I tried one out yesterday. A lot of barrel distortion and green/magenta
> aberation at the edges. The aberation is uncorrectable.
> If you like I can supply a RAW. I might look at the 17-40 next.
>
> Mike Engles


Hello
A correction. Try as I might I could not remove the aberation last night
using the CS2 Lens correction tool. I have just tried again in Photoshop
ACR31 RAW and I have been able to remove the aberation.
ACR31 is very good for removing chromatic aberation from RAW files.

http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/LensCorr.jp...

Mike Engles
Anonymous
May 12, 2005 11:07:45 PM

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

Mike Engles wrote:
>
> Hello
> A correction. Try as I might I could not remove the aberation last night
> using the CS2 Lens correction tool. I have just tried again in Photoshop
> ACR31 RAW and I have been able to remove the aberation.
> ACR31 is very good for removing chromatic aberation from RAW files.
>
> http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/LensCorr.jp...


Heh, great example, huge improvement!
Anonymous
May 13, 2005 4:27:35 AM

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

On Thu, 12 May 2005 17:09:16 -0700, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net>
wrote:

>John A. Stovall wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 12 May 2005 11:09:03 -0500, Rob wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Contemplating purchasing EOS 20d but guess I need recommendations for
>>>general use lenses (non-professional). I expect I'll mostly shoot
>>>indoor family photos (perhaps as many as 10 people wide/picture) at
>>>night and outside mid day picnic shots most of the time. For the
>>>family photos, I guess I'd be about 10 to 12 feet away from the
>>>subject but can't say for the outside shots. I'm looking for perhaps
>>>middle quality (won't break me but don't want cheap lenses either).
>>
>>
>> I would just buy the body and get the 17-40L.
>
>
>Yeah, if you can afford a 20D, you probably can afford a better lens. I
>don't know if that one goes to f/2.8 but that's what you want then don't
>worry about flash or just use a touch of flash, with that camera you can
>boost the ISO way up. A lot of older flashes have a dangerously high
>trigger voltage that can damage the camera (so be careful) and you'll
>need the latest spendy flash to get all the new features with metering.

17-40L is F4.0. the 24-70L is F2.8. From what he was looking at
shooting the 17-40 looks like a better fit with the crop factor. It's
also not as pricey as the 24-70L for an L it very reasonable.


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

"I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated."

-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
Anonymous
May 13, 2005 4:02:11 PM

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

Buy a 20mm f2.8 and 50mm 1.8 by cropping both you can effectively get
20-80 mm range. The f2.8 will help with the focusing. These two will
cost under $500. The 17-85mm would be next but I doubt the the quality
will be there and it's $600. The best as others have suggested are the
17-40 f4 for $700 and the 16-35mm f2.8 for 1,400. Either of these two
will require another prime or an additional l zoom. So the 16-35 +
24-70 is clearly the best choice but the cost is $3600.

I did some test shots with the 50mm f1.8 and the 28-135 IS at 50mm and
the difference was huge.
May 13, 2005 7:20:56 PM

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

In article <4284bf5e_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>,
eatmorepies <jan9mung9mun9day@lineone.net> wrote:

>You've decided to buy one of the best cameras around - now buy it the best
>lenses. It seems wrong to stick a £200 lens on a £700 body. Save up for the
>L series, once you've seen what they can do you won't want to use anything
>else.

For me, the price of a Tamron Zoom is vanishingly small compared to the
price of an L/IS Zoom, and in particular, compared to the bag of L
Primes I eventually want. In my case, it will be a long wait until I
can buy the lenses I really want, and I think the aftermarket lens is a
reasonable alternative to keeping the camera in a drawer for six months.
I'm getting some good use out of it, and my results are good enough to
satisfy me. Had I bought any of the lenses I really want, I wouldn't
even have gas money to go take pictures!

I don't think that means I should have bought a cheaper camera body,
though.
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 2:19:38 AM

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

"Mike Engles" <mike.sengles@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:4283A984.2340@btinternet.com...
> Mike Engles wrote:
> >
> > Rob wrote:
> > >
> > > Contemplating purchasing EOS 20d but guess I need recommendations for
> > > general use lenses (non-professional). I expect I'll mostly shoot
> > > indoor family photos (perhaps as many as 10 people wide/picture) at
> > > night and outside mid day picnic shots most of the time. For the
> > > family photos, I guess I'd be about 10 to 12 feet away from the
> > > subject but can't say for the outside shots. I'm looking for perhaps
> > > middle quality (won't break me but don't want cheap lenses either).
> > >
> > > Any opinion on the Canon 17-85mm ISUSM Lens that can come with the
> > > camera purchase? I've read conflicting info where one liked it for
> > > portraits but another said it showed distortion ???
> > >
> > > Also will I need a flash for the indoor portraits? I've got a 7 year
> > > old Sigma (???) flash that I used on a n6006 nikon but don't know how
> > > it would work here. Are the canon flashes much better ?
> > >
> > > thanks.
> >
> > Hello
> > I tried one out yesterday. A lot of barrel distortion and green/magenta
> > aberation at the edges. The aberation is uncorrectable.
> > If you like I can supply a RAW. I might look at the 17-40 next.
> >
> > Mike Engles
>
>
> Hello
> A correction. Try as I might I could not remove the aberation last night
> using the CS2 Lens correction tool. I have just tried again in Photoshop
> ACR31 RAW and I have been able to remove the aberation.
> ACR31 is very good for removing chromatic aberation from RAW files.
>
> http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/LensCorr.jp...
>
> Mike Engles

Where can i find this ACR31 program? I googled ACR31 raw and got nothing.
Thanks
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 2:19:39 AM

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

Dirty Harry wrote:

> "Mike Engles" <mike.sengles@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:4283A984.2340@btinternet.com...
>
>>Mike Engles wrote:
>>
>>>Rob wrote:
>>>
>>>>Contemplating purchasing EOS 20d but guess I need recommendations for
>>>>general use lenses (non-professional). I expect I'll mostly shoot
>>>>indoor family photos (perhaps as many as 10 people wide/picture) at
>>>>night and outside mid day picnic shots most of the time. For the
>>>>family photos, I guess I'd be about 10 to 12 feet away from the
>>>>subject but can't say for the outside shots. I'm looking for perhaps
>>>>middle quality (won't break me but don't want cheap lenses either).
>>>>
>>>>Any opinion on the Canon 17-85mm ISUSM Lens that can come with the
>>>>camera purchase? I've read conflicting info where one liked it for
>>>>portraits but another said it showed distortion ???
>>>>
>>>>Also will I need a flash for the indoor portraits? I've got a 7 year
>>>>old Sigma (???) flash that I used on a n6006 nikon but don't know how
>>>>it would work here. Are the canon flashes much better ?
>>>>
>>>>thanks.
>>>
>>>Hello
>>>I tried one out yesterday. A lot of barrel distortion and green/magenta
>>>aberation at the edges. The aberation is uncorrectable.
>>>If you like I can supply a RAW. I might look at the 17-40 next.
>>>
>>>Mike Engles
>>
>>
>>Hello
>>A correction. Try as I might I could not remove the aberation last night
>>using the CS2 Lens correction tool. I have just tried again in Photoshop
>>ACR31 RAW and I have been able to remove the aberation.
>>ACR31 is very good for removing chromatic aberation from RAW files.
>>
>>http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/LensCorr.jp...
>>
>>Mike Engles
>
>
> Where can i find this ACR31 program? I googled ACR31 raw and got nothing.
> Thanks

Adobe Camera Raw, the photoshop plugin for CS2. CS1 handles chromatic
aberration also.


--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
san francisco native plants
Anonymous
May 14, 2005 4:10:38 AM

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

On Fri, 13 May 2005 16:12:34 -0700, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net>
wrote:
snipped
>
>Adobe Camera Raw, the photoshop plugin for CS2. CS1 handles chromatic
>aberration also.

CS2 doesn't require a plugin for Raw support. It's built in for the
majority of RAW formats.

http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw.html

The 3.1 is only for the following cameras.

Camera Raw 3.1 — May 2005

*
o Canon EOS Rebel XT (EOS 350D/EOS Kiss Digital N)
o Nikon D2X
o Olympus EVOLT E-300
o Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom



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

"I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated."

-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
!