decisions decisions

fionaB · 29-05-2008, 23:50

so what would you buy.................. a wide angle 10-20mm or a Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM Lens (non-IS) OR...............Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens.... which is the better lens............... OR do I get a manfrotto tripod?

Steve400 · 30-05-2008, 00:08

the 10-20 and the 70-200, you might aswell get both and be doubly happy!!

fionaB · 30-05-2008, 00:17

not an option! has to be one and one only

Steve400 · 30-05-2008, 00:21

geepers its a tough call, the 70-200 is probably the one I would miss the most.....but then you maybe do more landscapes than me so.......

PM me your email addy and ill send you some sample shots if you wish!

Steve

**Dabhand16** · 30-05-2008, 00:42

I've got the 10-20, and a 70-200, and I find I'm using the 10-20 more.

But I would not like to be without the 70-200 though. I bought them both at the same time mainly because I saw the 70-200 at a stupid price the same day I bought the 10-20, so could not let it go. Were it not for that, I would have only got the 10-20 and would have been happy.

fionaB · 30-05-2008, 00:48

bloody hell you lot are NO help whatsoever! lolololol

**Angela** · 30-05-2008, 09:26

Personally I'd go for the 70-300 but that's because of what I like to photograph. But with the sort of images you like to take Fi, it has to be the 10-20.

***Steve*** · 30-05-2008, 09:37

I have both as well and would definitely go for the 10-20 first seeing as you mainly shoot landscapes.

Larne · 30-05-2008, 09:40

I also have to go with the 10-20mm. Having recently acquired a 70-200mm it is mainly just weighing my bag down and I only expect to use it for weddings and events. The 10-20mm is a really useful lens and it is on my camera a lot more.

M1ke A · 30-05-2008, 10:01

Looking at your gallery I'd also lean towards the wideangle. However if you don't have a decent tripod, I'd get something like a Frotto 55Pro or better.

AQ · 30-05-2008, 10:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by fionaB

bloody hell you lot are NO help whatsoever! lolololol

You could have said what you sort of pictures you wanted it / them for

. I know men are suposed to be able to know instantly what women mean whatever they actually say but that is a short range skill, that only works at home

.

To try and help.

I have a Sigma 10-20 and the Canon 70-300 IS. I like then both but obviously for very different things. I wish the 70-300 was a faster lens but I could not justify paying that much more and I did not want something too heavy. The 10-20 is really fun and I would go for that first for the sort of pictures you normally take.

To help even more - If you want to take wild life pictures then the 10-20 is not really that useful

**Markulous** · 30-05-2008, 12:31

Have to agree that it all depends on what pics you want to take - what use is the 'best' lens if you never use it?

And who says 10-20mm is no good for wildlife?

Tho' you do have to be very, very close!

Whipspeed · 30-05-2008, 13:29

Looking at what you shoot, the 10-20mm has to be the way to go, the Sigma is a good lens. I've just sold a 70-200 f4 IS and got an f2.8, as for sports it was the way to go for me. If it was a choice between the 70-200 and 70-300, I'd go for the 70-200 as I've heard it's a better quality lens.