Ultimate lens considerations

Now I think of taking an EF-S lens as primary zoom, although these cannot be used on a potential future FF sensor. The Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM seems to be a very good choice for €1,099 as it is a fast lens and has image stabilization, and it corresponds to a 27-88mm on APS-C sensors. It got a good rating in ColorFoto 12/2006 and it also gets really good values on the EOS 400D, which has almost the same sensor as the EOS 40D. However, in CHIP FOTO-VIDEO digital 06/2006 they say it has a little too high vignetting. Nevertheless, due to the high amount of light it allows macro lenses, and the constant minimum of f/2.8 at every focal length allows narrow depths of sharpness. Therefore I don’t need a separate lens for landscape photography. A cheaper choice would be the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (€599), and it would also have a wider focal length range of 27-136mm on APS-C, but DigitalKamera.de say that it’s not suitable for landscape photography on the EOS 30D. CHIP FOTO-VIDEO digital 08/2006 says that it has less overall vignetting than the 17-55mm, but just at 17mm it is even worse. And the EF-S 18-55mm is a cheap shard.

Unfortunately, the teleconverters don’t work with EF-S lenses. But time will show if I really need a dedicated tele lens, and if so, I’d rather take the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM, as it got good ratings (ColorFoto 09/2006), can also be used on FF sensors and is not that expensive (€589). It even corresponds to a 112-480mm on APS-C, what might lead me to replacing it with the 100-400mm lens when I really switch to FF and really need that focal length. But that’s just want I didn’t want to do, buying two lenses and don’t continue to use them on FF.

Now I notice there might be another approach:

• Buy Canon’s 24-105mm lens (€999) and keep it for FF.
• Use Tokina’s 12-24mm f/4 AT-X PRO DX (€485) as wide angle lens for the first years on APS-C; it got a recommendation in ColorFoto 08/2007. It corresponds to a 19-38mm and allows screw filters with a diameter of 77mm.
• Use a 2× teleconverter (€349) for the 24-105mm instead of a dedicated tele lens. On APS-C this will become a 77-336mm. Later, on an FF sensor, I still can buy a real telephoto lens if 210mm are not enough. But it swallows a lot of light, and autofocus isn’t possible anymore for the 24-105mm lens.

By this approach, I’d have to spend €1,484 at once only for lenses, but I’d probably never have to add a telephoto lens; the teleconverter would raise the expenses to €1,833. If I buy the 17-55mm plus the 70-300mm instead, this would amount to €1,688, what is a little less although I’d have a longer focal length of 480mm plus autofocus instead of only 336mm without autofocus, but the lower limit would be 27mm instead of 19mm. However, on FF I’d soon miss that lower limit, as the 24-105mm stays at 24mm, and I might want a dedicated wide angle lens like the Canon EF 20mm f/2.8 USM (€499, recommended in ColorFoto 08/2007) what would replace the 12-24mm with almost no additional cost.

It’s so hard.

If I take my PowerShot A710 IS as reference, it has an equivalent focal length range of 35-210mm. Sure, sometimes I wished it had an even higher zoom, but I made such pictures rather unfrequently. Much more constraining was the rather high lower limit of 35mm, I hardly got buildings or wide landscapes fully onto the sensor. Considering these limits, the 17-55mm lens corresponds to a 27-88mm and would therefore provide some wider angles, but I’d soon miss the higher focal lengths. Therefore a possession of a dedicated tele lens seems inevitable. If I take the 24-105mm instead, it corresponds to a 38-168mm what is not far from the 210mm of the PowerShot in the upper limit. But the need for a dedicated wide angle lens raises.

The choices now seem to be:

• High-quality 17-55mm f/2.8 plus the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 make €1,688.
  Advantages:
  
  • Fast lens.
  Disadvantages:
  • 17mm correspond to 27mm, what is still quite high.
  • The first lens might have to be replaced in the future.
  • I don’t really need a tele lens equivalence of 112-480mm, because I won’t do serious animal photography in the first time.
• 12-24mm f/4 plus 24-105mm f/4 make €1,484.
  Advantages:
  
  • Appears cheaper.
  • 12mm correspond to 19mm, what could still be lower, but is acceptable.
  • Higher limit of 168mm (APS-C) is enough for the first time.
  Disadvantages:
  
  • I don’t have the higher focal length of 300mm (480mm) if I really want to use it one day. Therefore I’d have to buy the tele lens anyway, what raises the overall costs. But at least I have more freedom of choice, I could still buy the 100-400mm one day, but if I buy it too soon (for the APS-C), I’m pampered with a 160-640mm lens.
  • The first lens might have to be replaced in the future.
  • f/4 might be too few for me one day. But if this is really so, then I can still buy an additional f/2.8 lens with fixed focal length.

I noticed that I’ll have a preference for really wide angles, and so the second possibility (12-24mm plus 24-105mm) seems to be the most reasonable one. I also see that it doesn’t make too much sense to try to look too far into the future. I know that I won’t need a tele lens now, so I simply don’t buy it now.

Let’s see if that analysis continues when I’m up to buy that whole stuff. I’ll start with the DSLR camera body and the 24-105mm lens, what amounts to €2,298. Including two fast 4GB CF cards, one additional battery and a camera bag, this raises to about €2,600. The 12-24mm and a tripod will follow shortly later, raising this to about €3,200. Yeah!