30D and 24-70 2.8 L?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
I

intogamer

Lifer
Dec 5, 2004
19,219
1
76
I was able to snag a 30D and was wondering would it be an overkill to start off with a 24-70 2.8 L lens? Long story short, I'm helping my friend downgrade (ebay) his 1Dm3 and his 24-70 2.8 L lens. However, I may be able to convince him to trade my laptop for the just the lens. Should I start out with a cheaper lens? 50mm 1.8 II can be had for $70~ from Staples after PM/AC

edit: I plan to own a T2I in the future (missed out on the CB deals :() for the combined HD video and photo capabilities.
 
I

intogamer

Lifer
Dec 5, 2004
19,219
1
76
angry hampster said:
You don't want a 24-70 on a 30D. It will likely not be wide enough for you. Start out with a Tamron 17-50 or Sigma 18-50HSM.
Click to expand...

You make a good point. My ideal use is to take pictures of computer parts, background imagery, and video. At 24mm I had some difficulties focusing on close-up shots. Would 17mm be wide enough?
 
Maximus96

Maximus96

Diamond Member
Nov 9, 2000
5,388
1
0
I vote for the 24-70. It's a great lens, until you start to go after L primes. I wish I still had mine during our last family trip. I found 24 on crop to be wide enough, for me.
 
I

intogamer

Lifer
Dec 5, 2004
19,219
1
76
Maximus96 said:
I vote for the 24-70. It's a great lens, until you start to go after L primes. I wish I still had mine during our last family trip. I found 24 on crop to be wide enough, for me.
Click to expand...

I like the range, however, when I will need it the most, I will benefit from the image quality (focus?) in close-up shots. Including the bulkiness of the 24-70, I'm still uneasy on walking with an essentially $1k~ lens + $800~ body (in the future) on the "streets"
 
ElFenix

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,393
8,552
126
intogamer said:
You make a good point. My ideal use is to take pictures of computer parts, background imagery, and video. At 24mm I had some difficulties focusing on close-up shots. Would 17mm be wide enough?
Click to expand...

focusing on close up shots has practically nothing to do with the focal length and practically everything to do with minimum focus distance. going wider will only mean you need an even smaller minimum focus distance to get what looks like a close up shot. a macro lens or even just a plain close focusing lens is what you need for close in shots of small products. the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro has a minimum focus distance through its focal range of 7.9", which at the long end is good for a magnification of 1:3.

if all you're shooting at super close range is products, get a canon 50 f/1.8 and an extension tube set. that will let you get very close and have large magnification for cheap.
 
S

Suspicious-Teach8788

Lifer
Feb 19, 2001
20,155
23
81
Mmm the 24-70 isn't that great of a lens IMO on a cropper. Plus it's not even that sharp anymore with today's sensors. I'd actually take a 17-55 in your case but I do see that you can acquire the 24-70 easily and stuff.

Like the poster above said, magnification size is key and minimum focusing distance, not the focal length. There are some lenses where you can get pretty decent magnification like the 55-250 which is a zoom lens. Given its MFD when fully zoomed in with extension tubes, you can get pretty decent magnification. The 50mm f/1.8 + extension tubes works too. I mean you're not gonna get crazy magnification though. You would need a true macro lens to do that if you want like 1.3x mag or something, which is pretty insane already.
 
Maximus96

Maximus96

Diamond Member
Nov 9, 2000
5,388
1
0
a hacked, cheapo canon 35-80mm can get you close to 2x mag, for about $20 on ebay, shipped
 
I

intogamer

Lifer
Dec 5, 2004
19,219
1
76
When my payment posts on my Discover Card (new card with low limit FTL but 5% CB at Staples), I will try to get a 50mm f/1.8 II. I just picked up the Canon 30D today and will play around with he 24-70 tonight. The extension tube set looks good. Any suggestion for a versatile walk around lens? Sigma 18-50mm? If it's worth the bang for the buck, I'm willing to fork it in ;)
 
A

angry hampster

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2007
4,232
0
0
www.lexaphoto.com
The Sigma 18-50 is a seriously good lens. You will find the build quality to be EXCELLENT compared to the 50mm f/1.8.


The 24-70 is a great lens..it is my primary piece of glass on my 5D. However, I don't like the way it feels on cameras without a secondary grip. This is why I never use it on my 30D..it's just too heavy that it throws off the balance.
 
S

Suspicious-Teach8788

Lifer
Feb 19, 2001
20,155
23
81
Since your 24-70 is already your low light lens, I would suggest the Canon 18-55mm IS. It's the kit lens but it's ridiculously sharp. If you want lowlight, I would suggest the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 NON-VC. If you want something even nicer, the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 will do. L-quality optics.
 
C

Cattykit

Senior member
Nov 3, 2009
521
0
0
intogamer said:
I like the range, however, when I will need it the most, I will benefit from the image quality (focus?) in close-up shots. Including the bulkiness of the 24-70, I'm still uneasy on walking with an essentially $1k~ lens + $800~ body (in the future) on the "streets"
Click to expand...

I've been walking around with 3k camera and 1.5k lens without a bag and it had never been a problem for many years. This, however, may not be the thing do to if you live in certain areas.
 
I

intogamer

Lifer
Dec 5, 2004
19,219
1
76
Cattykit said:
I've been walking around with 3k camera and 1.5k lens without a bag and it had never been a problem for many years. This, however, may not be the thing do to if you live in certain areas.
Click to expand...

Where do you live? I live in Boston.

I've been using the 24-70 (throws off the balance with the 30D) and would like to get more wideness. Suggestions on 10-20 type of lenses?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom