For most lenses it is not necessary. But my 17-55/2.8 IS would be useless without it.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
The 16-50 F4L IS sounds REALLY intriguing, lets hope it's around 1k and I'll buy it.
I keep thinking I'll move into a full frame but, truth be told, it gets more doubtful as I age. For that reason I haven't spent a lot on EF-S glass but all the praise the 17-55 is getting sure impresses me.
I may break my prejudice about buying EF-S lenses and pull the trigger on the 17-55 2.8 IS when my photo-fund gets rebuilt.
I've never been an adherent of the 'I'm getting a FF camera someday so I won't but EF-S' school of thought. But the lens(es) you need for the camera you have today. Particularly if the EF-S lenses are the top ones (17-55, 15-85, 10-22), where resale value is strong. When I eventually sold my 10-22 and 17-55, I think I lost a combined total of ~$120 from what I paid new for them - pretty cheap 2-3 year rentals.
IMO, the EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS is the best general purpose zoom for APS-C. However, it is a little short for a travel lens whereas the 15-85 is better suited. If taking the 17-55, I'd be inclined to bring a longer lens, too. I found the 100L Macro IS to be a great second lens for travel, since it does both tele and macro very well, and gives you f/2.8 across the board (with the 15-85, I'd consider a 430EX II or at minimum a 270EX II).
Contrary to popular belief, flash does not injure babies.If you want to capture images of a baby with minimal lighting, get a 6D... This would be a better choice.That's silly. Why wouldn't one improve the lighting instead?
Why? Did you read what he wants? Do you think that maybe using a flash in a babies eyes is the best way to go?
"My first child is due on the first of May and I want to document his early months with a DSLR."
I stand by my recommendation. A child is not going to be running around in his first few months, or years, and blinding him with bright lights would not be the way I'd treat my child.
Babies sleep in broad daylightBaby sleeping?If you want to capture images of a baby with minimal lighting, get a 6D... This would be a better choice.That's silly. Why wouldn't one improve the lighting instead?
If you want to capture images of a baby with minimal lighting, get a 6D... This would be a better choice.That's silly. Why wouldn't one improve the lighting instead?