# Change from T3i to 70d, or invest in a new lens?



## lcb (Dec 23, 2013)

Hi all!
I am new in this forum, I have just registered because I would like to hear your suggestions.

Last year I bought a T3i, together with a EFS 18-55/3,5-5,6 IS II and a EFS 55-250/4-5,6 IS II.
I really like it, and I used it a lot. I use it mainly when I travel, what I do very often due to my work.

I always liked to take photos, but I am not a Pro. Fortunately, this year I could save money to invest in my equipment. I thought I could buy a new camera - first I thought in changing to a full frame, but my budget is not enough. Then I thought I could buy the new 70d, as I could buy the body only and use my EFS lens. My idea is that after some time, I could start buying EF lens (70d supports both EF and EFS) and later on, I could change to a full frame (if I see I will really take advantage of the difference).
I would like to take better quality pictures, and honesty I don't care very much of new features as the built in Wi-Fi. Do you think I will get any difference with a 70D?

But I also thought that I could invest in a new lens instead of a new camera. I read good comments about the EF-S 15-85/3,5-5,6 IS USM. I would have a longer focal length lens, and wider.

I would like to hear from you what would you do - jump to a 70D or invest in this (or other) lens?

thanks!

Leo


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Dec 24, 2013)

My opinion is to invest in superior quality lenses, and wait for new camera models in the future (who knows T6i, or T7i). Canon 15-85mm lens is a good quality, but will not make a big difference in picture quality, it is as dark as your current lens (F3.5-5.6). On the other hand, Canon 17-55mm F2.8 will make a big difference, because it remains in 55mm F2.8 and allows better use of the available light. That way you can use a lower ISO, which will improve the quality of clearly without changing camera.


----------



## rpt (Dec 24, 2013)

Before anybody jumps into some sort of comparison you need to share what kind of pictures you take, what are you unable to take and why you are unable to take them with your current gear. There are always pros and cons but your acquisition should be driven by your need to take pictures (or video)...

Look forward to your narration.


----------



## mifho (Dec 24, 2013)

The sensors aren't much different in terms of picture quality until you get into ISO past 6400. If you find you're throwing away a lot of shots due to not being sharp focus, then you could benefit from the better AF system of the 70d. Otherwise, you'll get better photos from better glass. 

You really don't have any "fast" (wide aperture) lenses; you could probably benefit from getting something at f2.8 or lower. The 17-85 seems to only buy you the additional focal length over your kit lens, and since you've already got 55-85 covered in the 55-250, you'd probably be better off buying the 17-55 f/2.8. When I shot crop, I had a good copy of the Tamron 17-55 f2.8 VC and it was my favorite lens (until i dropped it); but I may have been lucky with that copy.

Check out reviews on the-digitial-picture.com and search flickr groups for the lenses you're interested in to see what others are doing with it. Also, go through your past pictures you liked and see if you see a common theme with focal lengths. You might find that you're shooting a lot of shots at 24, 35, 50, 85, or 100mm - all of which, canon makes great affordable fast primes in.


----------



## m8547 (Dec 24, 2013)

I also have a T3i and the two lenses you mention. Like others have mentioned, you need to think about how your current gear is limiting you, and what kind of photos you want to take.

If you get a new lens, I suggest a wide angle, especially if you do landscapes. Look at the Tokina 11-16. It's EF-S, but it's relatively inexpensive and the image quality is outstanding for the price. There's a new II version, but as far as I can tell it's not visibly better than version I.

You have the 18-250mm focal range covered well. The 55-250 is an outstanding lens for the price. It's sharp, light weight, and has a long reach. The 18-55 is also very good. Do you find either of them to be limiting? For example, if you shoot wildlife a lot, you might want a longer focal length than 250mm. Or if you do low light a lot, you might want something faster than the 18-55. The Sigma 18-35 F/1.8 would be awesome if you want to stick with EF-S but shoot indoors a lot.

People might suggest an inexpensive fast prime. I bought a couple of them: the Canon 50mm f/1.8 and the Rokinon 35mm f/1.4, and honestly I almost never use them. For me, 50mm is too long on a crop body, and the 35mm lens is heavy and manual focus, and I'd rather have the versatility of a zoom. 35mm is too long for star fields, though it would have been nice to be able to use f/1.4 for that. 

I use my 11-16 a lot, but still not as much as I'd like. It takes awesome star field photos, but just barely. It would be nice to have more light or less noise to work with. I love the wide angle perspective, but it takes skill to get really great wide angle shots. It's probably me favorite lens, even though I've taken relatively few photos with it so far.

I like shooting the night sky, and I'm in a place where I can do it, and my plan for future gear acquisition is based around that. Once I have a few thousand dollars lying around I want to buy: A full frame body like the 6D or whatever it's successor is (6D II?), the Tokina 16-28 which is the full frame equivalent of my 11-16, and the Tamron 24-70 which is almost as good as the Canon 24-70 II for a lot less money. According to DXOMark, the Tokina 16-28 is *sharper* at it's peak than the Zeiss Distagon T 21mm f/2.8 ZE (tested at f/4 vs f/2.8, respectively)! For less than half the price, I'll take it! And I would keep my T3i and 55-520 for telephoto shots since it's cheaper, smaller, and lighter than a big full frame telephoto.

Think about what you want to do. It sounds like you aren't set on full frame, so you can get good lenses for less money by sticking with EF-S. Going to full frame is a several thousand dollar commitment. 

In summary, here are my suggestions for lenses that would offer new possibilities:
Tokina 11-16 for wide angle shots.
Canon 24mm TS-E or another TS-E for architecture, landscapes, etc. 
Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 for low light/ indoor shots


----------



## Andy_Hodapp (Dec 24, 2013)

If your just shooting with kit lenses on a rebel, I would really recommend going for a Sony RX10. If your traveling around a lot, it's perfect! No need to change lenses and a constant F/2.8 lens.


----------



## nc0b (Dec 24, 2013)

I started with crop bodies, the original Rebel D300, then years later the 60D. Two 28-135mm lenses had the IS feature fail. After buying a 5D Classic, I have changed directions. I do have the EF-S 15-85mm f/4-5.6 lens, and it works very well on the 60D or my 40D. I find, however, unless I am shooting wildlife or birds in flight, I prefer the way my full frame lenses work from a focal length standpoint for general photography with a FF body. I will not be buying any more EF-S lenses, nor any more variable aperture lenses. I now also have a 6D, and I am generally grabbing the FF bodies these days. 

You can see my lens assortment at the bottom of my post. Many of these lenses were purchased on the used market. The L lenses have had no failures, and they hold their value quite well if you choose to upgrade later. The newer bodies have lower noise than the older ones, so generally I have found f/4 lenses with a constant aperture to be adequate. That said, for indoor events the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II is a stunning lens but with a significant price tag. 

Bottom line, buy good FF lenses if you can, and then pick up a full frame body when finances allow.


----------



## FTb-n (Dec 24, 2013)

I went from an XT, to a 60D, to a 7D, and finally the 5D3. Before getting the 7D, I bought the 70-200 f2.8L II and the 17-55 f2.8 for use with my 60D. For me, these are THE lenses for crop bodies. You need to examine the focal range that you shoot most often, then choose which lens to invest in first.

I most often shoot candids, events, and indoor sports. The 70-200 is an ideal lens for these situations. It was my most used lens on the 7D and is now even more useful on the 5D3.

The 70D offers a better focus system for both action stills and video than the T3i. If focus issues are an issue, then the 70D is worth considering. However, the 17-55 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 will give you a bigger bump in image quality than upgrading to the 70D. These lenses are sharper and faster. The 2.8 alone will give you greater subject separation if shot wide open and will make many of your images pop. For available light, there are no better choices in zooms.


----------



## drob (Dec 24, 2013)

I'd probably invest in a new lens. The 70D is tempting as it has some nice features but as others have mentioned, the image quality might be slightly better but the higher ISO performance doesn't necessarily warrant an upgrade. You will probably see better results from a lens. My bit of advice though is to invest in one that will work with full frame. I made the mistake of investing in several lens which only work on crop sensors and everytime I'm tempted to jump to the 6D and/or the 5DMkIII I'm held back by the fact that half my lenses won't work. I'm holding off hope for the 7DMk2 or whatever pro-crop sensor that comes out next to have better higher ISO capabilities or I might have to bite the bullet and try to sell the crop lenses. Lenses I would recommend though are: 24-70mm L F/4 (good all around lens, not to pricey; the 2.8 is much better but expensive), 17-40mm L F/4 or the 16-35mm L F2.8 for travel/lanscape. If your are looking for a good ultra wide, look to the Samyang 14mm 2.8. Sure it's manual but it's cheap and sharp. Who's in a big hurry to shoot landscapes? All are compatible with full frame if in 4 years you decide to by go that route. Good luck. 

Only way I would upgrade to the 70D is if you're into video as the dual pixel sensor is supposed to be outstanding.


----------



## streestandtheatres (Dec 24, 2013)

I have the same camera as you, and the same lenses, until recently when I bought a Sigma 35mm 1.4 and a Canon 400mm 5.6 And with them I feel covered at the moment. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelhooper/)
And that makes me agree with the person who asked what photos you take.
For me, I love the challenge of a prime, and I hope to get good at it some day! (I hired a 17-55 for a while, but I found the faster prime more useful.)
M


----------



## Jim Saunders (Dec 24, 2013)

For your consideration, I took this with my 50D with a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 (non-VC) and some off-camera light, a little love in Lightroom 5. I recommend all of those to you for a step up without breaking the bank.

Jim


----------



## rs (Dec 24, 2013)

Andy_Hodapp said:


> If your just shooting with kit lenses on a rebel, I would really recommend going for a Sony RX10. If your traveling around a lot, it's perfect! No need to change lenses and a constant F/2.8 lens.


Constant f2.8, yes, but due to it's smaller sensor it's not better in low light or DoF options than an f3.5-5.6 lens on APS-C throughout the zoom range. Take a look at this comparison to the 18-135 lens from dpreview:


----------



## Ruined (Dec 24, 2013)

lcb said:


> Hi all!
> I am new in this forum, I have just registered because I would like to hear your suggestions.
> 
> Last year I bought a T3i, together with a EFS 18-55/3,5-5,6 IS II and a EFS 55-250/4-5,6 IS II.
> ...



Save for a 6D and a 35mm f/2 IS USM.


----------



## koolman (Dec 24, 2013)

Hi,

I use a t2i. As far as sensor and overall image quality - all the current crops are very close of not identical 18MP camera. The 70d 20 MP seems to be more of the same - with a very slight improvement as far as digic 6 and more MP. Bottom line - the 70d is not a "jump" in IQ. (if you do video that's a whole other matter as the 70d has ground breaking constant AF)

I would easily recommend the 15-85 which I use allot as your "go to" lens as a superior general lens. The 15-85 is a pleasure to use, durable build, nice and wide, nice and long, fast AF, great colors.

The only cons I can think of are:
- A little nose heavy on the rebel - get a grip to balance this out.
- Some annoying lens creep - the grip will help for this as well - as the camera will hang from your neck nose "out" and not nose "down" because of the balance / weight of the grip at the bottom of the camera.

Assuming you have the 15-85 (15mm is very nice on a crop!) you might want to get the nifty fifty as a fast prime for portraits or more artistic work.

I would even say - to prefer the 15-85 over the 17-55 for your purposes as a travel lens. For most outdoor usage the 15-85 is more attractive as it is wider and longer, lighter to carry, and built stronger.


----------



## moocowe (Dec 24, 2013)

I would personally get some new glass rather than a new body. I don't see much point in getting the EF-S 15-85mm since you already have the 18-55 and 55-250. For the same price as a 70D body on Amazon, you could get:

Tokina 11-16mm, Canon 50mm f/1.8 and Canon 85mm f/1.8
or
Samyang 14mm, Canon 50mm f/1.8 and Canon 100mm non-L macro
or
Samyang 14mm, Canon 40mm pancake and Canon 85mm f/1.8, with a little left for a spare battery/memory card

All the above lenses are faster than the 2 zooms you have, and generally get good reviews. If you are considering moving to full frame in the future, the Tokina is the only one of these lenses not designed for full frame. It did kind of work as a 16mm prime on my 5D, but the corner quality was poor so I swapped it for the Samyang.


----------



## rs (Dec 24, 2013)

If you're purely looking at detail/resolving power and noise, here is a way of quantifying your choices:

70D vs T3i resolving power with the same lens:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=458&Camera=845&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=458&Sample=0&SampleComp=0&CameraComp=759&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
With such a good lens, there is a slight difference between the two bodies, but it really doesn't amount to much. Use a lesser lens such as variable aperture EF-S zooms, and that difference will be pretty much gone.

70D vs T3i noise:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Comparisons/Canon-EOS-70D-ISO-Noise.aspx
Again there are differences, but even after scrutinising it, it's difficult to say which one wins that test.

18-55 II vs 15-85 on the same body:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=675&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=0&LensComp=763&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0
Again, a slight difference, but it really doesn't amount to much.

However, with both upgrades there are aspects which IQ tests don't reveal: handling, AF, viewfinder, silent AF with manual focus always available, etc. If any of those are high up on your list, then the body you suggested or the lens you suggested could well be worth considering.

As many others here have suggested, look for a lens which doesn't do what your existing lenses do; ultra wide, a fast prime, macro etc. And there's nothing to stop you using EF lenses with your T3i to prepare the way for your intended future FF purchase.

However, this is the crucial factor which it all revolves around:



rpt said:


> Before anybody jumps into some sort of comparison you need to share what kind of pictures you take, what are you unable to take and why you are unable to take them with your current gear. There are always pros and cons but your acquisition should be driven by your need to take pictures (or video)...
> 
> Look forward to your narration.


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 24, 2013)

lcb said:


> Hi all!
> I am new in this forum, I have just registered because I would like to hear your suggestions.
> 
> Last year I bought a T3i, together with a EFS 18-55/3,5-5,6 IS II and a EFS 55-250/4-5,6 IS II.
> ...


The biggest impact you can have is by shooting in RAW and post processing with software like Lightroom...

Going to a 70D will get you a better user interface and greatly improved focus. If you are dealing with fast moving events this will be a great help, if not the difference will be minimal.

A new lens can have a great impact.... But only if you need it. For example, the 70-200F4IS has stellar IQ, fast focus, reasonable weight, and is a joy to use, but if you are looking for a landscape lens it is a poor choice. Likewise, the 10-22 is great for landscapes but if you are looking for wildlife pictures it is a poor choice. 

Figuring out needs and priorities should come before new gear.


----------



## tron (Dec 24, 2013)

If you intend on staying at APS-C format for long and you enjoy travel photography I would suggest a Canon EF-S10-22 (I had one until it was stolen with other gear).

Other choices however acceptable overlap with your existing gear.


----------



## CTJohn (Dec 24, 2013)

lcb said:


> Hi all!
> I am new in this forum, I have just registered because I would like to hear your suggestions.
> 
> Last year I bought a T3i, together with a EFS 18-55/3,5-5,6 IS II and a EFS 55-250/4-5,6 IS II.
> ...


I had a similar path - started with a T1i and the two lenses you mention. I decided to spend on glass first - picked up a copy of the EF 24-105L (which is available much cheaper now). It was a huge upgrade to the 18-55, although not quite as wide. My next buy was a Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6. Then I bought the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L, followed later by a Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro. 

About the time I bought the 70-300, I sold the T1i and bought a 7D. About a year ago I picked up a 6D and sold my Sigma lens because I now had the wide angle via 24mm full frame. The Sigma lens was probably the biggest mistake I made in this progression. I just didn't use ultra wide angle that much.

I now have the above Canon lenses and a 6D and 7D.

My intention was to spend on glass that would work on full frame, because I knew at some point that the price point of full frame would get to the point I'd jump.

I'm and amateur enthusiast, don't shoot every day, and love my current gear.


----------



## grey4 (Dec 24, 2013)

I upgraded from a rebel T3 to a 7D a few years back because I knew I needed the AF and Frame Rate for shooting sports. 

I'd recommend the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM, you'll probably want to get something different then what you already have in regards to aperture, the shallow DOF will give you the boost in quality your looking for. The 85 is my most used lens, you can see some photos here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/greysatterfield4/

I've also gotten good results out of the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non VC. It retails new at 500$ which is about half the price of the canon equivalent. It's not a world beater but it's a great value.


----------



## preppyak (Dec 24, 2013)

rpt said:


> Before anybody jumps into some sort of comparison you need to share what kind of pictures you take, what are you unable to take and why you are unable to take them with your current gear.


Yep, without this info, every response you've gotten so far won't be very useful. If you are shooting pictures of your kids and family you'd want a very different lens than if you were doing landscape work, or sports shooting.

Likewise, I can't tell if you'd benefit from a camera upgrade without knowing if you shoot action (frame rate and AF would be worth it), or if you shoot a lot of video (70D + STM lenses would be an upgrade).


----------



## unfocused (Dec 24, 2013)

Agree with those that say it depends on what you like to shoot.

My thoughts: if you find that the 18-55 is consistently a little too long at the wide end and little too short at the long end, consider the 15-85 EFS. It's a great, sharp lens and the extra mm at both ends makes it much more versatile for a walk-around lens.

If you find that you need need a faster lens for low light shooting, look at the 17-55 mm 2.8 EF-S. But, understand that you'll be paying a premium for a small gain in aperture.

If you find that the 250 mm on your telephoto just isn't long enough then...well...frankly the only Canon lenses I would recommend would be the 70-300 "L" or the 100-400 "L" but both are expensive and the 100-400 is pretty good sized to be carrying around as your main telephoto zoom. A good budget solution is the newer Tamron 70-300 VC zoom. It's better and cheaper than the Canon consumer grade IS 70-300 zoom.

While the Tokina 11-16 is a great lens, you really have to like the wide-angle perspective to make either it or the Canon 10-22 zoom worthwhile.

The main limitation with the T3i over the 70D or 7D would be the autofocus. If you find the autofocus of the T3i is causing you to miss shots, then it's probably time to consider an upgrade. 

In short, the simplest answer is a question: what do you feel you are missing with your current setup? If you find yourself unable to make the shots you want because of your lenses, look for new lenses. If you find yourself unable to make shots because of your camera, look for a new camera that has the features you need. If you find that your final pictures aren't what you envisioned, then invest in better software.


----------



## m8547 (Dec 24, 2013)

unfocused said:


> While the Tokina 11-16 is a great lens, you really have to like the wide-angle perspective to make either it or the Canon 10-22 zoom worthwhile.



Wide angle opens up new possibilities. If you look at the most popular camera settings for Reuter's best photos of 2012
http://petapixel.com/2012/12/02/the-most-popular-cameras-and-settings-for-reuters-best-photos-of-the-year-2012/
you will see that 24mm and 16-35mm on full frame are both very popular. Those are equivalent to 15mm and 10-22mm, respectively. The Canon 10-22 might be a bit more versatile, but the Tokina is inexpensive and along with the 18-55 covers most of that range. You can click through and see what photos are taken with those lenses, and see if you want that look.


----------



## DanielW (Dec 24, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Figuring out needs and priorities should come before new gear.





unfocused said:


> In short, the simplest answer is a question: what do you feel you are missing with your current setup? If you find yourself unable to make the shots you want because of your lenses, look for new lenses. If you find yourself unable to make shots because of your camera, look for a new camera that has the features you need. If you find that your final pictures aren't what you envisioned, then invest in better software.



You won't get better pieces of advice than those two.


----------



## mwh1964 (Dec 24, 2013)

Get a 50mm F1.8 or 1.4 and learn to use these before further money into photo hobby.


----------



## mkabi (Dec 25, 2013)

My advice, buy yourself a new lens.
But before jumping the gun, see the difference between your 18-55mm and a simple 50mm 1.8 II


----------



## WPJ (Dec 25, 2013)

rs said:


> Andy_Hodapp said:
> 
> 
> > If your just shooting with kit lenses on a rebel, I would really recommend going for a Sony RX10. If your traveling around a lot, it's perfect! No need to change lenses and a constant F/2.8 lens.
> ...


F8 I don't get your comment. I have a 7D and I find a huge difference from my 18-200 3.5-5.6 to my 24-105f4 and my 70-200f2.8 dog bokeh you name it can you explain to me Tue graph and your perspective please?


----------



## rs (Dec 25, 2013)

WPJ said:


> rs said:
> 
> 
> > Andy_Hodapp said:
> ...


The RX10 has a f2.8 lens, but it's sensor is smaller than a T3i's, so it's not the same as an f2.8 lens on a T3i. It's the equivalent of a theoretical 15-125/4.7 lens on a T3i. That's all.

If you have a selection of lenses to use on one camera, then the sensor size is no longer a variable. Which means there's no need to do any calculations to do any comparisons. So in your case that f2.8 lens is greater than f4, which is in turn greater than f5.6.


----------



## WPJ (Dec 25, 2013)

Gotcha, I thought you were trying to say that on a crop sensor the aperture didn't matter but on full frame it does. Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## tntwit (Dec 25, 2013)

I also have the T3i.

I went from the original 18-55 (from my 300D) to the 15-85. Shortly after that, I also bought a 50 1.8.

As noted, you need to look at your needs.

Personally, I love the 15-85 for its range and speed/accuracy of auto focus. Depending on what and how you shoot, the "you already have the 55-85 range covered" argument may be a bit short sighted. I also have the 75-300, so a similar argument is you won't miss the 55-75 range, so your covered. However, for me, the 55 was never quite long enough and I wasn't sure 85 was going to cover it. I really wanted the 18-135 for the range, but we have that lens at work (not the STM version) and I really don't care for it. It just never seems quite sharp enough and it just doesn't have a great quality feel to it (this is perception - not necessarily a practical reality). Having used the lens for about 9 months now, I am pleased with the range for my type of shooting (but maybe not for yours).

The other consideration is that since getting the 50 1.8, my biggest disappointment with the 15-85 is that it isn't a fast lens. Take others advice and pick up a fast prime - it really does add a whole new dimension to your arsenal of tools. I say this because (and this again depends on what you shoot), with slow glass in most lower light settings your going to be as wide open as the lens will go because the other option will be a higher ISO or a slower shutter speed (and you are usually pretty slow to begin with in lower light settings) meaning that adjusting the aperture really isn't an option because you are already maxed out so to speak. I find that most of my shots are wide open. With the 1.8 I now have some flexibility that I didn't have before. The 18-55 lens will be around 5.0 or 5.6 at 50 mm vs 1.8 with this prime. I think that works out to somewhere around 3 stops. With this option I now find myself stopping down for a variety of reasons depending on the situation, where I wouldn't have if I was stuck at 5.0 or 5.6. My favorite feature of this is the OOF background it can produce and because of that alone, I now love this rather cheap lens and really want more fast primes. I can be an addiction. 

Having said that, it is not easy shooting a narrow depth of field and one reason why the 50 1.8 is so great. You can practice with one for around $150 and probably get half back later if you decide to upgrade to the 1.4 or better. 

For me, what I've come to realize is the 15-85 is a great lens for most of my general photography and the prime fills in where the fast aperture can be a benefit (usually portraits). I plan to add a few others (feel free anyone for suggestions - thinking about the 85 1.8 for maybe the Sigma 30 1.4 - trying to figure out what I'll use more) as I think this is the best fit for my needs. 

What I found was, on a crop f2.8 isn't that fast in terms of OOF backgrounds and with the same basic range of the 18-55 I don't think I would have been happy with the 17-55. I prefer the 15-85 with a few primes. 

Using the 15-85 with the 430EXII is an exceptional package and if you use a flash frequently then an external flash should be another upgrade path to consider. This combination produce great results for family pictures indoors because the range is ideal, it focuses fast, the flash recycles much faster than the built in and with the ability to bounce off the ceiling, typically more pleasing lighting (this is another art in itself).

One argument I have seen elsewhere, but not here, is to buy the lens for what you are shooting now. FF lenses don't have an optimized range for crop. Again it depends on your needs, but for me 24 isn't wide enough (24-70 lens). The thought here is good glass holds it's value and if you go FF later you can recoup most of it and benefit from the optimized range in the mean time. Many here think of whatever you do lose as a rental fee of sorts.

And I planned on keeping this response short. 8)


----------



## greger (Dec 25, 2013)

Nice pics streetsandtheaters. lcb if you shoot similar pics then get the 100-400 f4.5-5.6 Big White or wait till vs2. If it doesn't get announced in early 2014 then get vs1 when Canon Rebates are out. Not only will it cover almost all focal lengths that you will need for BIF and wildlife you will get a work out carrying it around. ;D
We bought my wife a 70D and she loves it. She hasn't had it long enough to tire of the 18-135 lens that came with it. You should go body only as you have those focal lengths covered already. I did a search for 70D for sports and haven'tread enough to know how well the 70D is in AI Servo. It is a very good camera and so is my 7D. I get good pics of BIF 7D. My wife has taken a few pics of BIF but hasn't set the camera up to use AI Servo yet.


----------



## lcb (Dec 25, 2013)

Hi All!

Thanks, thanks, thanks!!

I really didn't expect to get all these answers so fast! 
Believe me I learned a lot reading you! 
I got good advices from almost all of your messages, and I got the point that first I need to think about the limitations with my current gear and what I expect from a new lens/camera.
I should really reply to each of your messages, but that would not be possible for me now - I need to do my luggage right now, I am heading to Thailand and Vietnam for my honeymoon!

So, summing up, I decided to invest in a lens now (actually I will buy it in Bangkok). I have now to choose if I go for the Canon 15-85 or another one you suggested, the 10-22 or equivalent.
The 15-85 will allow me to go just a little wider, but I like it covers a wider range, and as many times due to my work I can't take all my gear with me to the street, that would be good. I also saw some photos and found it is 
very sharp!
As I like taking photos to architecture and landscapes, the 10-22 will be great also...I like wide angles.
On the tele side, I think for the moment I am covered with the 55-250. 

BTW I think I will buy some ND graduated filters for my landscape photos. As soon as I come back from my trip to Thailand and Vietnam I will share with you the results.

I take advantage to share with you some of my photos.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/l_c_b/sets/
As an enthusiastic hobbyist, your comments will be highly appreciated!
Also perhaps looking at them you could see which lens would be better for me.
What it is for sure, in 2014 will dedicate time to learn how to use Lightroom and others. 
I think that would be a clever investment... 

Again, thanks all for your great suggestions!!

Have a Happy New Year folks!
Leo


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Dec 26, 2013)

The 10-22 is an excellent addition to the two lenses you already have - particularly for the landscape opportunities that travel provides. I would also buy a 50mm f1.8. It's basically pocket change in today's
photographic market, but an excellent bargain on a quality lens. (If you can double the money, the f1.4
is also a good choice). The 50 will give you some extra light, but it, to my view more importantly, will also
force you to compose your pictures and "think image" much better than any zoom. My next choice would 
be the 85mm f1.8 - also a price performing excellent lens. The last two have the added advantage of
working nicely with a full frame camera when you decide to "step up".


----------



## rany (Jan 19, 2014)

I want to update my canon to 70D


----------

