Confused: Lense line-up for Canon 50D!

[jiankeith]

Bob,
Hi!

Currently I have a Nikon D70 with Sigma 28-70 which I purchase 3 years ago. I need the upgrade now that DSLR cameras are designed better than before and price is a bit cheaper for advanced cameras.

I was planning to take 50D but the sudden steep reduction of Nikon D300 here in Saudi Arabia made me think twice. (nikon dealer here reduce the price same as the Canon 50D around 1,538 USD). But when I studied the lense line-up of Nikon, I liked the 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 BUT my wallet can't justify the price difference since I am not yet a PRO earning a living in photography.

So I came back to Canon 50D which offers more affordable L-series lense. After reading reviews I was convinced 50D is a very good camera as opposed to some bad reviews it received.

For the lense line-up I picked for the 50D is canon 70-200 F4 IS USM (Nikon does not have this kind of superb lense that is lighter to carry and light in the pocket too as compared to nikon 70-200). I am having a hard time picking a lense in the wide to mid-range zoom. I am considering 24-70 f2.8 but the price is high and a little heavyn (others said you will get used to it), I am also thinkingof the 24-105 f4 but I fear I might not be able to use the 70-200 F4 which is a very good perfoming lense and I'll be using for portraits and outdoor events. I think apart from IS the other selling point for 24-105 is its range but overall performance 70-200 f4 IS exceeds the 24-105 from 70mm up. Also this is one factor that convince me to move to Canon, I tried it in store and I love the images and feel of it.

I also considered to use 35mm prime to be use as a normal lense and 24mm prime for group shots but eventually it is too annoying to be changing lense at all times, Other lenses like 17-55 and 17-85 is not on my consideration as they are EF-S only.

I have to admit, I am tired and confused which lense I can take to pair with the 70-200 f4. I am considering 17-40 f4 L lense and might add 50mm 1.8 for low light. But I read one review telling the 17-40 as "Although the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM Lens can be a good people lens, it is not a good short-distance people lens. A head shot from this lens will emphasize the subject's nose more than the subject will want."

Does this has to be a big concern since I am shooting people events mostly and changing lense takes time specially in fast-paced events. My question is with 70-200 f4 to be use for portrait and candid people shots, how can I be convinced that 17-40L (being cheaper) is the lense I will take for my general purpose zoom.

Note:
I am only considering Canon's L lense so the choices would be 17-40; 24-70 and 24-105 or whichever you can recommend. (my budget is still stretchable though!)
Thanks.

[Bob Atkins]

I wouldn't rule out the EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM. It's not an "L" lens, but it's still very good. It's not likely that Canon will put an "L" on nay EF-S lens no matter how good it is. The 17-55 is fast and has IS. The "L" series lenses in this range are either slower or do not have IS.

If you must go "L" and rule out the EF 16-35/2.8L and 24-70/2.8L, then the EF 17-40/4L or 24-105/4L IS are your best options. On a 50D, 24mm isn't all that wide, so that really only leaves the EF 17-40/4L. It's a good lens and a lot of people are very happy with it. It would be nicer if it had IS, but if you don't need IS, it's a good choice.

[jiankeith]

Bob,

Thanks for the kind reply and suggestion.
I might take either 17-40; 24-70 or 17-55 to pair with 70-200 f4 IS.

I had just read your Canon 50D review on photo.net and it was an excellent one!
However, I read a post that color rendition of Nikon D300 is much better in D300 as compared to 50D
but others said the color saturation of Nikon D300 can be achieved in 50D by tweaking the white balance settings.
Hope you can post an easy way to properly do it as i have no idea how to it's done.
Or can it be done through canons DPP?

[Bob Atkins]

I take all those color comparison reviews with a pinch of salt.

While it may be true that one camera produces "better looking" JPEGs with all the camera controls set to the default settings, that really doesn't matter much. You can set the 50D (and all other EOS DSLRs) to the sharpness, saturation and contrast that you want, plus you can fine tune the color control, all via menu settings. If you shoot RAW and use DPP you can get pretty much any color rendition that you want "after the fact". I'm sure that the Nikon and Canon software engineers use different default settings for most things. An image with lower saturation and less sharpening may not look quite so good "out of the camera", but it may be easiet ro post process without creating undesirable artifacts. For example many digicams turn up the sharpness and saturation to increase the "wow" factor of their images. If you applied the same saturation and sharpening to a DSLR image, it too would have a bigger "wow" factor, but it would show more artifacts.

For someone who just wants to "point and shoot", it's possible that one DSLR might have an advantage over another with the default settings. However the whole point of a DLSR is that it isn't a point and shoot camera and that you DO have control over how the image looks. If someone doesn't take advantage of that, then it's as much their problem as that of the camera. Some people light darker images, some like lighter, some like more saturation, some like less, some like high contrast, some like low. There's no camera that will turn out perfect results with the default settings for everyone.

Also, I wouldn't believe any post you read on the web unless you know who it is who is posting it. Every camera and every lens ever made has been trashed by someone! There are people who will swear that Nikons are better than Canons and just as many people who will swear that Canons are better than Nikons. You'll find people who will say the EOS 50D is the best camera they have ever owned and others who will claim to have returned theirs because they hated it. Go figure. I think it probably says more about the people making the postings than it does about the cameras.

I'm not saying that the D300 color rendition isn't different from that of the 50D. It probably is since it's a different camera from a different manufacturer using a different sensor and different software. It may even be true that the D300 has slighly better color performance. However what I'm saying is that after optimizing each camera's individual color tuning options, the difference is likely to be small.