What lens for 7D EF-S or L

[vlim]

I would say buy a used a 7D body and save some money for an L lens 17-40 f/4 L IS and a 70-200 f/4 L IS, you can even found them used and in great condition for a good price ! Lenses and your knowledge of how to use them are 2 most important things for making great pictures !

[bchernicoff]

I used the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 on my 7D and loved it. You might also consider the EF-S 15-85. It's supposed to be L sharp, but not as fast as the 17-55. You wouldn't need f/2.8 for landscapes though.

 http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-15-85mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

[awinphoto]

I would say buy a used a 7D body and save some money for an L lens 17-40 f/4 L IS and a 70-200 f/4 L IS, you can even found them used and in great condition for a good price ! Lenses and your knowledge of how to use them are 2 most important things for making great pictures !

At times I wish there was a 17-40 F4 L IS.  =)  But at this time there is only a 17-40 F4 L

[The Bad Duck]

If you plan on continue using APS-C cameras then you should consider EF-s lenses. I used to own a canon 10-22 and I really liked it better then my 17-40 /4 L on my 30D. And still, I liked it better as a superwide zoom on crop then I do with the 17-40 on my 5DII. But I had to upgrade camerabody and I don´t look back.

So, take a close look at 10-22, 17-55 /2.8 and 15-85. Non L? So what? Never mind that. The high quality ef-s lenses are great. Find out what focal lengths and f-stops you need, then take your pick.

For landscapes you probably step your lenses down to f/11 or f/16 or something and use a tripod so maximum apeture does not seem that important. Perhaps Samyang 14 /2.8 is interesting? Manual focus and manually setting apeture but for landscapes that should be easily manageable.

Another thing with ef-s lenses is they are often lighter, smaller and cheaper then EF lenses and that´s all good. Anyway the important thing is that there are great non-L lenses out there.

Take a look here http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/best_canon_eos_lenses.html
You will find that the ef-s 17-55 /2.8 is rated above the standard L zooms 24-70 and 24-105 even when price is no object. You will also find that only the canon 70-200 zooms and the sigma 300-800 are getting higher scores. The other lenses are primes and often L primes with crazy high pricetags.

Good luck and have fun building your system (and shooting with it!)

[ksuweh]

I own a 7D, 17-55, 35 L & 70-200 II L. The 17-55 is a GREAT lens! The optics are L quality & the body is rugged....just not L rugged. You definitely do get what you pay for! I have shot with my buddies Tokina 11-17 & it is extremely wide! I love that lens! The 17-55 is a GREAT general purpose lens & I think that it would make a good landscape lens, but the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM Lens would probably be a better lens for what you have described your needs are. Plus, it is $300 cheaper. The L quality is VERY ADDICTING!! Lenses are the real investment! Canon might make the same version of a lens for 10 years or more, as long as you take care of them the resale value is always better on a lens than a body, bodies wear out & need replaced more often & the image you take can only be as good as the lens.

[awinphoto]

For landscapes you probably step your lenses down to f/11 or f/16 or something and use a tripod so maximum apeture does not seem that important. Perhaps Samyang 14 /2.8 is interesting? Manual focus and manually setting apeture but for landscapes that should be easily manageable.

Except that with crop bodies, especially the 7D, diffraction starts setting in around F7 give or take, but when shooting landscapes you can get away with shooting F7.1 because most the time you are focuses at or near infinity and everything will be in focus regardless unless you have objects in the extreme foreground, but if you leverage hyper focal distance, you should get great results at wider apertures.   

[neuroanatomist]

The EF-S 17-55mm is the place to start...IMO, it's the best general purpose zoom for APS-C.  In fact, optically it outperforms the 17-40L, 24-70L, and 24-105L when they're all compared on APS-C.  The 15-85mm is also quite a good lens, but better suited to outdoors due to the slow/variable aperture.

[kdw75]

The EF-S 17-55mm is the place to start...IMO, it's the best general purpose zoom for APS-C.  In fact, optically it outperforms the 17-40L, 24-70L, and 24-105L when they're all compared on APS-C.  The 15-85mm is also quite a good lens, but better suited to outdoors due to the slow/variable aperture.

I had the 17-55mm on my 7D and sold it to buy a 24-70mm L lens just a couple weeks ago. I know copies vary, but I noticed that the 17-55 was softer, at least at the center, than my 24-70 is. My 24-70 also seems to have richer colors and better contrast. Then of course the build quality is noticeably better and it feels very balanced on my camera. Just hard to get used to the barrel being extended at 24mm.

[nicku]

I normally enjoy shooting landscape etc and want to get some lens, I currently have an XSI and want to upgrade to 7D or 7D2 or 70D depending on how much I can save up.. But figured I needed glass first.    So for a crop sensor what do most people like to use?   Since the wide L lenses are 28mm or equivalent to a 35mm EF-S I don't know if they will be wide enough.   Any thoughts?

Thanks

I strongly suggest 17-40 f/4 L USM lens... very good IQ and at a good price. for shallow DOF i suggest 50mm f/1.4.

[awinphoto]

I normally enjoy shooting landscape etc and want to get some lens, I currently have an XSI and want to upgrade to 7D or 7D2 or 70D depending on how much I can save up.. But figured I needed glass first.    So for a crop sensor what do most people like to use?   Since the wide L lenses are 28mm or equivalent to a 35mm EF-S I don't know if they will be wide enough.   Any thoughts?

Thanks

I strongly suggest 17-40 f/4 L USM lens... very good IQ and at a good price. for shallow DOF i suggest 50mm f/1.4.

Before i got my 5d2, i used the 17-40 as a general purpose lens on my 7d... not much zoom range but adequate... sharper at 17mm than the 40mm, but not really noticeable unless your pixel peeping.  I used the 17-55 on loan from canon for a week and a half... it was good, did a credible job... didn't "wow" me but that's just me... different strokes for different folks... in the end the 17-40 had very good quality, excellend build and weather sealing, i could take it anywhere in rain/snow and was forward compatible as I moved to the 5d2 (and kept the 7d as a backup.)  Go to a camera store and try them out before you buy, or you may get buyers remorse. 

[Marsu42]

Since the wide L lenses are 28mm or equivalent to a 35mm EF-S I don't know if they will be wide enough.

Most people forget that you can easily assemble a panorama from a *static* scene with software like AutoPano. Just shoot around wildly without a tripod, import the pictures, press the button, done. I have to do this because my "shortest" lens is 28mm on a crop body - it takes a little time to assemble 3 vertical shots to one horizontal 3:2, but the results are very good. So you don't need a wide angle lens to "take it all in" once in a while. Ultrawide lenses like the 11-16 (I'll get one if I have the cash) are for creative effect, not shooting landscapes (refer to Ken Rockwell for this...).

[szmigielDESIGN]

Since the wide L lenses are 28mm or equivalent to a 35mm EF-S I don't know if they will be wide enough.

Most people forget that you can easily assemble a panorama from a *static* scene with software like AutoPano. Just shoot around wildly without a tripod, import the pictures, press the button, done. I have to do this because my "shortest" lens is 28mm on a crop body - it takes a little time to assemble 3 vertical shots to one horizontal 3:2, but the results are very good. So you don't need a wide angle lens to "take it all in" once in a while. Ultrawide lenses like the 11-16 (I'll get one if I have the cash) are for creative effect, not shooting landscapes (refer to Ken Rockwell for this...).

I agree.

AutoPano is cheaper than a good wide-angle L lens, and shooting 9 - 24 images at 24-35 mm focal gives wonderful results - especially when you output your panoramas at 50% resolution.

My workflow using 7D and 15-85 is this: I usually take from 12 to 40 pictures of one scene (mostly architecture, focal from 15 to 35 mm) using a tripod (so I have less work in post), create a planar panorama with perspective correction and export a TIFF at 50%. This gives me super-sharp picture at approximately 15 - 25 megapixels.

[Marsu42]

especially when you output your panoramas at 50% resolution.

You're correct - I forgot to mention that - I already reduce the resulting panorama to 66%, too. But with 3 vertical shots combined to one horizontal, it's still higher resolution than one native picture.

[awinphoto]

especially when you output your panoramas at 50% resolution.

You're correct - I forgot to mention that - I already reduce the resulting panorama to 66%, too. But with 3 vertical shots combined to one horizontal, it's still higher resolution than one native picture.

A few years ago I specialized in virtual tours and would use software like this to make my panos, but then there would always be some snag in the alignment or this and that and I'd take them into photoshop and perfect them in there, and then now with the photoshop 5, the automerge and auto blend has gotten so good and seamless i never get misaligned or blemished items and for me, it works seamless.  My panos have died off as with technology getting better and cheaper and the economy going down the shitter, my clients are able to do their own tours... Not as good, clean or well lit as what i could do, but as far as they're concerned, free to them... So i've rebranded myself and evolved with the times...

[RC]

Just throwing out another option and I realize it is probably not the best one for most crop shooters but here's what I did. 

My primary lens for my 7D was the 15-85.  A lot of things about this lens I really liked but overtime the excessive distortion at 15mm and the lack of weather sealing became issues for me.  So I sold the 15-85 and bought the 16-35 II and later added the 24-105.   Yes a lot more money but I do enjoy the weather sealing and constant aperture.  16mm is barely wide enough for me and it is possible I could buy or even rent the 10-22 if I need to go wider.

I do agree as many have already posted the 10-22, 15-85, and 17-55 are probably the best general lens choices for most APS-C shooters.  But if you got the funds and weather sealing is important, you might look at the 16-35.

My personal suggestion for how wide for landscapes would be at least 24mm FF which is 15mm crop--that is why I say 16mm is barely wide enough for me.