Need some advice: New lens or New camera body?

[NikonKid]

I'm actually posting this question for my girlfriend.
She's a Canon user and needs some advice on what she should do.
And since I'm a Nikon guy and not too familiar with Canon, I thought I'd ask you guys!

She's currently got a T1i along with the following lenses;

Canon 18-55mm
Canon 55-250mm
Canon 50mm f/1.8
Tokina 10-17mm
Tokina 100mm f/2.8

She's either wanting to sell her 18-55 and 55-250 and use the money towards a 24-70mm f/2.8 L or sell her T1i along with those two lenses and get a 7D.

Which would you guys recommend she do first; upgrade her body or get some better glass?

Thanks in advance!

[ngoduyviet]

Sell the two kit lenses & get the 24-70 2.8, then sell the rest of the lenses and get the 70-200 2.8. Unless she needs something from the 7D that she can't do with her T1.

[nameBrandon]

I agree with Viet. The 24-70 is a great lens, and IMO, you'll definitely see more improvement moving to L glass than going from a T1i to a 7D.

If she ends up looking to go the 70-200 2.8 IS route, let me know, I have a Mark I I'm looking to get rid of! ;)

[Photogdude]

get the glass

[Tom]

I'm not a fan of the 24-70L Canon lens. Just too soft. Much prefer the sharper 24-105L or the cheap primes (35 2.0/50 1.4 or 1.8/85 1.8)

[J Eddington]

Glass. Glass can grow with her if she upgrades cameras but cameras are just lost. One thing to consider is to make sure new glass will work with a full frame for when she might want to go that way. I also agree with Tom about the 24-105. I could (if I had to) live with just two lenses the 25-105 and the 70-200.

[venchka]

She should sell all the Canon stuff. Borrow your Nikon stuff.
Grinning.

[contributor_M]

24-70L is sharp as a tack. I've tried the 24-105L and I didn't like it honestly. I would get the 24-70L and keep the T1i.

I've been looking to upgrade to the 7D at one point, but couldn't justify the reason. Now, T1i to a FF, that's another story.

[mmuhlenkamp]

For a crop camera I'd rather have a nice 17-50 f/2.8 zoom (the Tamron is nice and a bit cheaper than the Canon version) than a 24-70L (24 isn't very wide on a crop) and then maybe 70-200 f/4. She already has the two primes (50 and 100) for lowlight stuff and the 24-70 is a brick of a lens (one reason I prefer primes much of the time, the nicer zooms are just a tad heavy and get annoying to me).

Sell the two zooms and get a Tamron or Canon 17-50 f/2.8 and a 70-200 f/4L.

Obviously there are lots of options , but that's my 2 cents ;)

[Snarfy]

What does she typically shoot? Is low light and shallow DOF capability important to her style? Is zoom range important/necessitated? Does she need really fast AF usually?

[shnitz]

I agree with Tom and Melissa that the 24-70 is not necessarily the lens that she should be looking at. I definitely agree that she should sell the 18-55 and 55-250. While the 10-17 gives you that wide angle, unless you have a 5D, you really want to stay with a midrange zoom that starts between 15 and 18mm, so that you're not having to switch lenses to go from normal to medium wide-angle. The Tamron 17-50, as mentioned, is nice. You seem to like Tokina, so try the 16-50 as well.

I disagree that you should sell the rest of your lenses to fund a 70-200 lens. The Tokina 100mm, in addition to having image quality (arguably at least as good as the 70-200), it provides macro capability. The 10-17 gives you that nice wide angle for architectural photography. The 50mm is absolutely sharper than the 70-200. The only time I would recommend giving up all of those lenses is for a wedding photographer, where one camera will have a midrange zoom, and the other camera a 70-200. While your preferred version of the 70-200 is absolutely an amazing lens, and has its place in pretty much every photographer's bag, I don't agree that it's a replacement for anything your girlfriend has, except the 55-250.

[crazeazn]

glass first...but the right glass

[Snarfy]

Originally Posted by shnitz

The 10-17 gives you that nice wide angle for architectural photography.

It is, however, a fish eye lens (rather than a RL-UWA).

I will once again stress the importance of knowing what she intends to shoot. There are many amazing lenses to choose from, but the necessities of the photographer will dictate which of them are the most important. We can all sit around and list our favorite L glass and the many reasons that the lenses are great, but gaining a little more insight to her needs will probably narrow things down a lot faster.

[KJ Smith]

For the most part, the glass of her choice is best.

But, before you consider the 24-70, find one to mount on that camera and see what she thinks.

That is a huge lens on a very small camera.

[contributor_M]

True KJ. If the OP haven't done so already, Rent the lens(s) she are thinking of buying and test drive them.


That's how I figured I wanted the 24-70L. Everyone here has offered some other good lenses.