Before black jack 21 card credit debt option reduction…

…

…

…

…

…

…

Buy zoloft Buy cheap zoloft online. Buy cheap zoloft online. Generic zoloft…

The other specialty lens I’ll use is a Carl Zeiss 50/1.7 w/ the EOS adapter. This is the sharpest lens I’ve found. I have a comparison here- http://gallery.real-exposure.com/gallery/579905/1/24268967

I learned that when testing both, the Canon IS lens produced better results when handheld, but the Zeiss lens was the winner when I tested on a tripod. The IS on a less ideal lens, makes up for a lot of handshake on a better lens just enough to have all that extra sharpness be a wash.

Damn it! I new i should have just looked it up online. Well, at least I put “I think” in there. Bah!

It’s a prime lens, so you won’t be doing any zooming, but it’s tack-sharp and works great in low light.

Other than that, I guess any of the L lenses are awesome. I dunno, I’m a Nikon guy myself.

Then check out FredMiranda (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/) keeping in mind that many people on there tend to go overboard in their reviews. (If I hold it slightly left angled toward the sun at 95.3% and open the lense wide, trembling a little bit then there is a vignetting on the lower left side that is visible when scaling the photo to 9 Apple 30″ Displays ;))

If you ever think about going for a full frame model like the 5d, then taking the L lenses is a good idea because they work well on that body. If you can live with working with the 30d for some time, then you can look at some EF-S lenses.

The EF-S 17-55 IS USM (not the standard one) doesn’t have a huge range, but seems to be very good and you could then take the Tamron 10-22 which is very good and the Canon 70-200 4L. You would be all set.

I am looking to buy the 70-200 f/2.8 IS next, combined with a 1.4x multiplier. This will be my zoom lens for most zoom scenarios short of wildlife. On the wider side, this works well as a portrait lens.

I am also looking to grab the 16-35 f/2.8 for landscape work, and later on maybe a fixed 35 or 50 mm f/1.4 for candids as my photography progresses.

The 17-40 f4 that was suggested is a great buy in terms of quality for $, but I don’t think this lens would be ideal for low light shooting, at least not in comparison to the 16-35.

Oh, and although you’re probably still right about the crop factor eliminating the vignetting issues associated with the 24-105, it’s only a 1.3 crop factor on the 30D (i think). So for the 17-40 it would actually be more like a 22mm equivalent.

I’d go for a 24-105 f4 L IS (smaller, lighter, bigger range, vignetting problem killed by the 1.6 crop effect) or a 17-40 f4 L if you need the wide angle (you get a 28mm equivalent)

I prefer the versatility and ease of use that is found with the zoom lenses and I believe that with three particular lenses you can cover the greatest focal range with great quality. The three lenses I suggest are as follows:

1. 16-35mm f2.8L
2. 24-70mm f2.8L
3. 70-200mm f2.8L IS (IS Optional)

All these lenses provide excellent low-light performance and cover a very wide range of focal lengths. Most people consider the 24-70 to be a great “walk-around” lens.

If you’re looking for a lens that you will rarely have to switch out, I’d consider the EF 24-105mm f4L IS lens. Since this lens does not open up to 2.8 it can be argued that it is not as suited for low-light situations as the 2.8 lenses are. However, don’t forget that this lens is an “IS” lens and that can make up for about three stops!

Although the 24-105mm lens would be great, keep in mind that the 30D suffers from a 1.3x Crop factor. That means you wouldn’t really be getting the view of a 24-105, it would be more of a 31-136. You’d really be missing out on the wide-angle possibilities. Hell, even with the 16-35mm you’re missing out, but not nearly as bad (imo).

Well, you can’t go wrong either way. Best of luck!