Lens Combination

[saltydog44]

After reading much (Mostly here), I think I am going with the following (But I have a question):

28-135 (Came with 40D)
Purchase:
17-55
70-300
50 f1.4

I was considering a Macro (60 or 100) but it seems like a diopter would be easier and more reasonable although price isn't a huge deal.  If I did that should I get one for the 28-135 or the 70-300?  What would the resulting distance/magnification be?  Or should I consider it with the 17-55 since it is faster? 

Or should I just go with the Macro?  If so Why?

Also I wish I had a fast ~300mm  or more option that didn't break the back/bank even it was a prime.  Any ideas?  I don't think that would be a Canon!!

Emerson

[mjperini]

Emerson,
You have a really fine camera, I also have a 40D,(as well as a 1Ds3) I don't have the kit lens but it has a versatile focal range and will be useful for many situations.
Before I or anyone else could make a reasonable recommendation  we would ask "what do you want the "Next" lens to do that is not being done by the lens you have.
For example, you mention macro, if that is a significant interest and you intend to make that one of the types of photography you do often, by all means get a macro lens, the difference in quality will be obvious. But if you want to shoot the occasional close-up of a flower or butterfly a diopter lens would probably suffice.
If you have kids and would like to do beautiful available light portraits with tack sharp eyes and a blurry background then a fast prime lens like the 50 f/1.4,85f/1.8 or 100 f/2 can't be beat. If you like wide angle, or shoot indoor groups, weddings , landscapes, the 17-55 f/2.8 is great. If you want to shoot sports the 70-300 IS is a very nice lens (just a tad slow).
Only buy what you need to fulfill your vision, buy them one at a time, and buy the very best you can. If I had any "universal" recommendation it would be that in this era of do everything zooms (many are quite good) it would be to acquire one very high quality fast prime lens in the focal length that appeals to you.
Good luck 

[saltydog44]

My biggest problem is I do a bit of all of it!  I am an amateur, but over the years I have taken a number of great shots - I don't have the inclination to do anything other than enjoy them, but a lot of folks have offered to buy them, so I guess I do pretty well for a doofus.  Grandkids sporting events, family photos, Yard and Garden for the Macro issues, nature on the property here and landscape when we travel!  Thus the idea of a wideangle, long zoom and a fast (50 f1.4).

Emerson

[saltydog44]

Bob and friends

I promise to stop asking questions soon!

What is the tradeoff of a diopter on a 28-135 or a 70-300?  Image size, focus distance differences?  I want to buy only one!

Emerson

[Bob Atkins]

I'd add a Canon 500D to the 70-300 rather than the 28-135. They work better with longer lenses and give a higher magnification. Also the 58mm version for the 70-300 is cheaper than a 77mm version (which you'd need to adapt down to the 72mm filter size of the 28-135 since you cant get a 72mm 500D).

See 58mm Canon 500D

[saltydog44]

Thanks Bob - you and your site are great resources - everyone seems really helpful.

Off to buy the 58mm 500!

Emerson