I want the Canon SLR 30D body only, which lense should I buy in addition? Im going to do some traveling?

Question

I asked a similar question and I have begun to realize Im in a little over my head so I decided to ask with more specifics.

I plan on going to Hawaii so I want to be able to take portraits as well as action shots (surfers surfing) and landscapes. I want to be able to take close ups of the flowers also. I would like the lense to have a good zoom but not a ridiculously big one.

I am going to New York in the summer so I want to be able to take shots of buildings and all the touristy stuff.

So if there are any recommendations please help! Thank you :]

Edit: I would probably be willing to spend about $300 or whatever the difference is between buying a 30D with the kit and the 30D body only

***Edit: Okay so is there a lense I could buy to just start out. I am by no means a "photographer" just someone who wants a good camera and lens to take pictures. Is there something you guys can recommend to start out with that isnt too expensive haha thanks :]

Answer 1

The 30D is a great camera and it deserves quality lenses. Here's a few ideas:
* the 60mm macro for flowers, etc. ($370) But this dedicated macro is an optional addition. Get one if this kind of photography is important to you, or make do without one if it's just for a small amount of your shots and you don't need the very best in image quality.
* the 10-22mm for super wide angle landscapes in Hawaii ($700)
Also an optional addition. If you don't get a super wide angle lens, make sure your standard zoom starts at around 18mm for normal wide angle shots. Zoom lenses that start at 28mm don't provide ANY wide angle coverage (due to the 1.6 focal length multiplier).
* the 17-55mm as your standard zoom ($1000), or the 17-85mm as a cheaper alternative ($515). These are my top 2 choices for a walk around lens.
* the 100-400 for surfing shots ($1370). For surfing you need an insane range. Regular 70-200mm tele zooms won't get you close enough to the action. But not only is the 100-400 expensive, it's big and heavy - this is not the kind of lens you want to lug around all day (unless photography is the purpose of your trips.) A slightly cheaper option is the Sigma 50-500 ($1000). Also big and heavy. Perhaps it's best to settle for the slightly inferior image quality and reach of the *much* cheaper and more compact Canon 70-300mm ($550)
---
added:
I just got back from the carnaval in Basel, Switzerland. I'll need the rest of the week to sort out the pictures and post process!
With the budget constraint, I'm starting to think the previous model, the Canon 20D, or even a Canon 400D would make more sense. It's the lenses that determine image quality - not the body. Getting a +$1000 body and then trying to save a buck on lenses is the wrong way to go in my opinion... I'd rather economize on the body.
So I'll stick with my recommendation for the Canon 17-85mm zoom as a good all rounder for $500. This zoom range should cover about 70% of your needs.
If you absolutely, positively need an all-in-one lens for under $300, get a Tamron or Sigma 18-200mm zoom. But please, consider it a temporary solution.
P.S. to Dr. Sam: Panacea is still alive and kicking in other categories. But he would have recommended the Canon 28-200mm. I remember because I blasted him for that on a few occasions. (Lenses that start at 28mm don't provide ANY wide angle coverage on a 30D. This severely limits their use for indoor shots, street photography, and landscapes.)

Answer 2

For all those things you want to do, you will need more than one lens. For portrait a basic lens like the Canon 17-40mm f/4 L would work good and is $700. For landscape you will need an ultrawide lens,Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5, which is one of best wide lens on the market and is also $700. For zoom photography of fast action like surfing, you will need at least a 200mm with Image Stablization (IS), a decent affordable lens is the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM for $550. Or if you can afford to pay a little more the, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS is a faster lens which means you can take photos that freezes the action better, but is more pricey at $1700.

Answer 3

How much money are you willing to spend? Thats the main question. I personally would buy 2 L lenses but thats hell of expensive for most people. Since this is travel, a wide angle through telephoto lenses. I would recommond the Canon 24-105mm f/4 IS L lens. I have it and it works like a charm. Its sharp and it never comes off the camera unless I need my Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L lens for sport games. If you cant afford a L lenses then I would recommond its little brother the 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5, its not the fastest lens in the world but itll be fine for your point and shoot moments. If you want IS and cheap I would recommond the 28-135mm IS.

Edit: If you do not want to spend money on a lens you kinda wasted your money on an SLR but most people can do with a $300 lens. get the Canon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 its a good general purpose lens. Highly recommonded.

Answer 4

Great choice..the canon 30D is a great camera.
First of, i recommend u the 28-75mm tamron F2.8 lens Marco
Its a great zoom lens and delivers great image quality.
It also comes with a marco setting...
Its also price rather reasonable...

Answer 5

I like some answers above me, but with a budget constraint, I understand the need to be careful with your choice.

I am not a Canon user, but one of our devoted Canon users recommended the EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (28-135 equiv.) ($500) as a good "walk around" lens. You can read about it here:

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=149&modelid=10511
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-85mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Answer 6

here's a link on ebay where you can read reviews of them by ebay members

Answer 7

N0 BUY KODAK ITS EASY TO USE!!!!!