Canon lens choices

A neighbor got Times Squared over the holidays, the net effect being
that he was charged $1400 for an attachment wide angle lens worth less
than $100.

He rained hell all over the merchant who has agreed to take back the
accessory and send him other stuff in exchange. He won't credit the CC
(BTW: anyone know NY law on this? Is the merchant obliged to refund the
cash for a return?).

He has the Canon XSi with the 18-55 IS kit lens. I assume that is adequate.

I'm helping him out in selecting $1,400 of gear, but no expert on Canon
lenses. So far all I've come up with is:

Canon 430EX ~245.00 -might change to 580 (rebate available).
Canon 70-300 f/var ~550.00

After that I'm stuck. This is not the kind of fellow who will want a
FFL lens.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
A neighbor got Times Squared over the holidays, the net effect being that
he was charged $1400 for an attachment wide angle lens worth less than
$100.

He rained hell all over the merchant who has agreed to take back the
accessory and send him other stuff in exchange. He won't credit the CC
(BTW: anyone know NY law on this? Is the merchant obliged to refund the
cash for a return?).

He has the Canon XSi with the 18-55 IS kit lens. I assume that is
adequate.

I'm helping him out in selecting $1,400 of gear, but no expert on Canon
lenses. So far all I've come up with is:

Canon 430EX ~245.00 -might change to 580 (rebate available).
Canon 70-300 f/var ~550.00

After that I'm stuck. This is not the kind of fellow who will want a FFL
lens.


28-135mm 3.5-5.6FIS is a very decent lens for the money ~$450ish
for low light a 50mm 1.4F ~$300ish
Any interest in macro? 100mm 2.8F macro ~$450ish

I would complain to CC company. They typically will refund with cause an put
a black mark on the retailer, which is why the retailer doesn't want to
refund...

-Jim

jimkramer wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
A neighbor got Times Squared over the holidays, the net effect being that
he was charged $1400 for an attachment wide angle lens worth less than
$100.

He rained hell all over the merchant who has agreed to take back the
accessory and send him other stuff in exchange. He won't credit the CC
(BTW: anyone know NY law on this? Is the merchant obliged to refund the
cash for a return?).

He has the Canon XSi with the 18-55 IS kit lens. I assume that is
adequate.

I'm helping him out in selecting $1,400 of gear, but no expert on Canon
lenses. So far all I've come up with is:

Canon 430EX ~245.00 -might change to 580 (rebate available).
Canon 70-300 f/var ~550.00

After that I'm stuck. This is not the kind of fellow who will want a FFL
lens.


28-135mm 3.5-5.6FIS is a very decent lens for the money ~$450ish
for low light a 50mm 1.4F ~$300ish
Any interest in macro? 100mm 2.8F macro ~$450ish

I'm pretty sure they're not into FFL. I'll be going over to play with
his camera, er, help with eqt. choices in an hour or so. Mostly aiming
for IS lenses as I also doubt he's into tripods...

Trying to avoid his lens current range of 18-55. Might suggest he sells
that and get a better zoom ... perhaps wider FL range if possible.

There are several lenses that sort of make sense such as the 100-300
f/4.5-5.6 but it's not IS.

I would complain to CC company. They typically will refund with cause an put
a black mark on the retailer, which is why the retailer doesn't want to
refund...

Unfortunately the CC co. is Amex, the absolute bottom of the barrel in
dispute resolution. Amex will not credit your account or suspend the
charge until the merchant agrees to the resolution. (MC, Visa suspend
the amount until resolved or until they see it's not resolvable; with
Amex you have to pay first - resolve later).

IAC, that's my neighbor's problem. I've urged him to apply pressure to
get the credit; the thieves, er, merchant are hanging onto that cash as
hard as they can.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
jimkramer wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
A neighbor got Times Squared over the holidays, the net effect being
that he was charged $1400 for an attachment wide angle lens worth less
than $100.

He rained hell all over the merchant who has agreed to take back the
accessory and send him other stuff in exchange. He won't credit the CC
(BTW: anyone know NY law on this? Is the merchant obliged to refund the
cash for a return?).

He has the Canon XSi with the 18-55 IS kit lens. I assume that is
adequate.

I'm helping him out in selecting $1,400 of gear, but no expert on Canon
lenses. So far all I've come up with is:

Canon 430EX ~245.00 -might change to 580 (rebate available).
Canon 70-300 f/var ~550.00

After that I'm stuck. This is not the kind of fellow who will want a
FFL lens.


28-135mm 3.5-5.6FIS is a very decent lens for the money ~$450ish
for low light a 50mm 1.4F ~$300ish
Any interest in macro? 100mm 2.8F macro ~$450ish

I'm pretty sure they're not into FFL. I'll be going over to play with his
camera, er, help with eqt. choices in an hour or so. Mostly aiming for IS
lenses as I also doubt he's into tripods...

Trying to avoid his lens current range of 18-55. Might suggest he sells
that and get a better zoom ... perhaps wider FL range if possible.

There are several lenses that sort of make sense such as the 100-300
f/4.5-5.6 but it's not IS.

I would complain to CC company. They typically will refund with cause an
put a black mark on the retailer, which is why the retailer doesn't want
to refund...

Unfortunately the CC co. is Amex, the absolute bottom of the barrel in
dispute resolution. Amex will not credit your account or suspend the
charge until the merchant agrees to the resolution. (MC, Visa suspend the
amount until resolved or until they see it's not resolvable; with Amex you
have to pay first - resolve later).

IAC, that's my neighbor's problem. I've urged him to apply pressure to
get the credit; the thieves, er, merchant are hanging onto that cash as
hard as they can.

There's always the 10-22mm EF-S 3.5-4.5F or the 17-55 EF-S 2.8F IS

The 18-55 is a crap lens if there ever was one. Have him get a 70-200mm IS
2.8F, he might need to shell out a little more cash. :-)

-Jim

jimkramer wrote:


There's always the 10-22mm EF-S 3.5-4.5F or the 17-55 EF-S 2.8F IS

The 18-55 is a crap lens if there ever was one. Have him get a 70-200mm IS
2.8F, he might need to shell out a little more cash. :-)

He's a P&Ser at heart. I don't thing 70-200 f/2.8 is for him.

The 10-22 or and/or 17-55 are good options.

Thx.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
jimkramer wrote:


There's always the 10-22mm EF-S 3.5-4.5F or the 17-55 EF-S 2.8F IS

The 18-55 is a crap lens if there ever was one. Have him get a
70-200mm IS 2.8F, he might need to shell out a little more cash. :-)

He's a P&Ser at heart. I don't thing 70-200 f/2.8 is for him.

The 10-22 or and/or 17-55 are good options.

Thx.



The 24-70 is a nice L lens, fast too. would he be happy with sharp
images?

Cheers

jimkramer wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
jimkramer wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
A neighbor got Times Squared over the holidays, the net effect
being that he was charged $1400 for an attachment wide angle lens
worth less than $100.

He rained hell all over the merchant who has agreed to take back
the accessory and send him other stuff in exchange. He won't
credit the CC (BTW: anyone know NY law on this? Is the merchant
obliged to refund the cash for a return?).

He has the Canon XSi with the 18-55 IS kit lens. I assume that
is
adequate.

I'm helping him out in selecting $1,400 of gear, but no expert on
Canon lenses. So far all I've come up with is:

Canon 430EX ~245.00 -might change to 580 (rebate available).
Canon 70-300 f/var ~550.00

After that I'm stuck. This is not the kind of fellow who will
want a FFL lens.


28-135mm 3.5-5.6FIS is a very decent lens for the money ~$450ish
for low light a 50mm 1.4F ~$300ish
Any interest in macro? 100mm 2.8F macro ~$450ish

I'm pretty sure they're not into FFL. I'll be going over to play
with his camera, er, help with eqt. choices in an hour or so.
Mostly aiming for IS lenses as I also doubt he's into tripods...

Trying to avoid his lens current range of 18-55. Might suggest he
sells that and get a better zoom ... perhaps wider FL range if
possible.

There are several lenses that sort of make sense such as the
100-300
f/4.5-5.6 but it's not IS.

I would complain to CC company. They typically will refund with
cause an put a black mark on the retailer, which is why the
retailer doesn't want to refund...

Unfortunately the CC co. is Amex, the absolute bottom of the barrel
in dispute resolution. Amex will not credit your account or
suspend
the charge until the merchant agrees to the resolution. (MC, Visa
suspend the amount until resolved or until they see it's not
resolvable; with Amex you have to pay first - resolve later).

IAC, that's my neighbor's problem. I've urged him to apply
pressure
to get the credit; the thieves, er, merchant are hanging onto that
cash as hard as they can.

There's always the 10-22mm EF-S 3.5-4.5F or the 17-55 EF-S 2.8F IS

The 18-55 is a crap lens if there ever was one. Have him get a
70-200mm IS
2.8F, he might need to shell out a little more cash. :-)

Whoa. The 18-55 IS, while it's in a cheap mount, is quite sharp--its
optical performance is in the same league as the 17-55 2.8--weaker in
some areas, stronger in others. No point in shelling out for the 2.8
unless you need the aperture. With 1400 to spend, the 10-22, the
70-300 VR, and the flash are pretty close to there.





--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Martin Riddle wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
jimkramer wrote:

There's always the 10-22mm EF-S 3.5-4.5F or the 17-55 EF-S 2.8F IS

The 18-55 is a crap lens if there ever was one. Have him get a
70-200mm IS 2.8F, he might need to shell out a little more cash. :-)
He's a P&Ser at heart. I don't thing 70-200 f/2.8 is for him.

The 10-22 or and/or 17-55 are good options.

Thx.



The 24-70 is a nice L lens, fast too. would he be happy with sharp
images?

I believe he'd consider that to be too big a lens. I'm sure he wants
good performance but as that lens is not IS (I'm looking at the B&H
paper catalog) and he's not likely to use a tripod, it's best capability
would go unused.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

Annika1980 wrote:
For $1400 I'd go with the 28-135 IS and the 70-200 f/4L IS.

Ah, B&H catalog does not show the IS version of the 70-200 f/4.

Good suggestion.

I'll probably suggest that and the flash.


Coupled with the 18-55 that he already has that gives him full
coverage up to 200mm.

If he shoots mostly wide-angle or portraits, he should scrap the kit
lens for the 17-40L and then add the 28-135 IS and a 430EX (or EX II)
Speedlight. If there is an extra $85 in the budget, add the super-
sharp 85 f/1.8 II.

I don't thing he wants a FFL.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

Annika1980 wrote:
On Jan 10, 5:40 pm, Alan Browne
wrote:
If there is an extra $85 in the budget, add the super-
sharp 85 f/1.8 II.
I don't thing he wants a FFL.

I had to go to the archives to see that you use "FFL" to mean primes.
One assumes FFL stands for Fixed Focal Length?

TTFN,
Your BFF

LOL!

YMMV, but FFL could mean Fast Flouride Lens! Or Flourite! Or F***** Fast
Lens. There are other possibilities ! I do hope we hear from others on
the use of primes to mean: LWDM [lenses which don't move- WTF!!??]
BRB

--
john mcwilliams