Reply to: Camera lens info wanted

[realityhack]

Isn't full frame a bit of overkill for the specified requirement?

Yep. The 5D is a tad excessive for those needs. Quality choice though.

[expat]

I don't know if, off the top of my head, the 5D is "full frame" or a 1.6x crop camera - if it's the latter, you might find the 28-105 a bit long at the short end for general purpose photography.

The 5D is full-frame. So indeed 28 is OK at the short end.

Isn't full frame a bit of overkill for the specified requirement?

* general photography, say of people or scenes, in other words the kind of pictures one might take on holiday

* close up detailed photography, say of a document or open book page, to obtain a maximum resolution image.

[Clownio]

Wibble !

[EvilWeevil]

I don't know if, off the top of my head, the 5D is "full frame" or a 1.6x crop camera - if it's the latter, you might find the 28-105 a bit long at the short end for general purpose photography. As with all things, money is the question - the 28-105 is reasonable at the budget end of the market - i have one myself, but if you might consider the

17-85 f4/5.6IS USM for the wider selection

or if 28mm is wide enough, and money not quite so tight.

the 28-135 3.5/5.6 IS USM is probably a better choice than 28-105.

(I am aware they're not on the list supplied!)

I'd also buy the 50/1.8 - because it's stupidly good value.

If it was my budget, I'd aim to spend significantly more on the lenses than on the body.

Also, be aware that the more you spend on a lens, the heavier it tends to be - which you may find irritating for walking around.


For the second thing, you need a decent macro lens. But personally, I'd use a flatbed scanner.

* IS indicates image stabilization.

[realityhack]

However, that shopping list carries a £3,559.97 price tag (£2,369.95 from Amazon), and the ones on your list will total $783.32. But you get what you pay for...

[realityhack]

Off the list, however, are the following:

The excellent EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM for general use.
The remarkable EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM as a second lens to compliment the above.
And the only true macro lens in the series, the crisp EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM.

That would be my ideal EF shopping list.

[realityhack]

From that list:

* general photography, say of people or scenes, in other words the kind of pictures one might take on holiday

Without a doubt the Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM II, it's small, light and a good multipurpose telephoto.


* close up detailed photography, say of a document or open book page, to obtain a maximum resolution image.

The Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM will do the job nicely. You'll appreciate a good tripod and/or copy stand, as has been mentioned.

[voodooflux]

...otherwise consider a 50mm Prime; they are absolutely amazing and have a very wide aperture to let lots of light in.

WHS - a very versatile lens also good for portraits and indoor shots in low light conditions, best partnered with a good tripod and a remote shutter release for stability.

[Peter Loew]

Calling any photography gurus, or moderately well informed photographers ..

Referring to the page here on Canon lenses, and clicking the "Accessories" tab, which lens would be best for:

* general photography, say of people or scenes, in other words the kind of pictures one might take on holiday

* close up detailed photography, say of a document or open book page, to obtain a maximum resolution image.

Please assume I know absolutely nothing about photography and am too stupid and lazy to learn (except that I will be very grateful for any constructive replies to this and will avidly read them).

edit: Also, please assume that money is no object, or at least that I won't quibble over a couple of hundred if it means getting a better or more suitable lens.

I think for holiday / walkaround use the Canon 17 - 85mm f/4-5.6 IS is a good lens to look at.

If you want close up stuff obviously a macro lens is good; otherwise consider a 50mm Prime; they are absolutely amazing and have a very wide aperture to let lots of light in.

[sasguru]

You boys should really stop drooling over kit and try to refine your artistic sensibilities and technical knowledge instead. You can buy a £100K camera and your pictures will still be worse than someone who has an eye for a scene and a disposable.

[crack_ho]

* close up detailed photography, say of a document or open book page, to obtain a maximum resolution image.

Canon EF 100mm f2.8 Macro USM. You will need a copy stand as well.

[OwlHoot]

I reckon-

Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM II

and this

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM

should cover it nicely. HTH.

To be honest, if money was no object I'd love something like this though-

Camera.

Wow, I'm dehydrated after drooling over that and reading reviews.

Someone pointed out that Canon would probably announce a 50+ megapixel camera within the next year or so, for the same target market of semi-professionals, to trump the Leica S2's 37 megapixels; but apparently Leica do the best optics (or "glass" in photographer's jargon).

(but $30,000 for the S2 is a bit over my head, unless the dollar takes a serious dive against sterling, which is unlikely while Borrown is around)

[Gonzo]

Calling any photography gurus, or moderately well informed photographers ..

Referring to the page here on Canon lenses, and clicking the "Accessories" tab, which lens would be best for:

* general photography, say of people or scenes, in other words the kind of pictures one might take on holiday

* close up detailed photography, say of a document or open book page, to obtain a maximum resolution image.

Please assume I know absolutely nothing about photography and am too stupid and lazy to learn (except that I will be very grateful for any constructive replies to this and will avidly read them).

edit: Also, please assume that money is no object, or at least that I won't quibble over a couple of hundred if it means getting a better or more suitable lens.

This is one of Realityhack's areas of expertise.

If you are lucky he might pop by and answer your question. I can't

[Fred Bloggs]

I reckon-

Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM II

and this

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM

should cover it nicely. HTH.

To be honest, if money was no object I'd love something like this though-

Camera.

[pmeswani]

Calling any photography gurus, or moderately well informed photographers ..

Referring to the page here on Canon lenses, and clicking the "Accessories" tab, which lens would be best for:

* general photography, say of people or scenes, in other words the kind of pictures one might take on holiday

* close up detailed photography, say of a document or open book page, to obtain a maximum resolution image.

Please assume I know absolutely nothing about photography and am too stupid and lazy to learn (except that I will be very grateful for any constructive replies to this and will avidly read them).

edit: Also, please assume that money is no object, or at least that I won't quibble over a couple of hundred if it means getting a better or more suitable lens.

There's a camera shop near Goodge Street station in London. I can't remember the name of the shop off hand... but they do a lot of camera stuff.