Within the Canon range, probably the 50 f/1.4 is best value. Can pick it up for about $400 new off ebay and although not L-glass (and hence not weather sealed), is definitely L quality. Sharper than than the 50 f/1.8 too, so if you can fork out an extra $250 you'll be grateful later. No-one EVER regrets buying the higher quality lens, but the reverse is certainly not true.
For wides on a crop camera, get a EF-S 10-22 - again not L, but it gives you the same useful range as the 16-35 on a full frame. It is around $700-$800 I think. Don't have one but all I hear is good.
For teles, I think the 300 f/4 is a cracker lens - tack sharp - and fast (but noisy) AF at f/4 (hunts a bit with a converter & f/5.6 though). There are four 70-200's (f/2.8 and f/4, IS and non-IS) which are all L (and weather sealed) and all good at what they do. The f/2.8 would be friggin' heavy to haul up routes though ... they also make great portrait lenses for when you're not climbing.
Slightly off topic, but in case you are in the market for a camera; the Canon 40D is superb ... 6.5 fps, weather sealed, 3 inch LCD, live view (if you're into that sort of thing) and a bargain at <$2K for the body only. Digi cameras have come a long way indeed.
In the pissing contest (and how I wish I had any of this shit back when I was taking climbing pics) ... 5D & 40D, 16-35 f/2.8 II, 24-70 f/2.8, 50 f/1.4, 70-200 f/2.8 IS, 300 f/4 IS, 1.4 TC, 430EX flash ... I also have a perfect condition 20-35 f/3.5-4.5 for sale (superseded by the 16-35) if anyone is after an excellent introductory wide zoom.
Of these, my favourite is the 300 (IQ is probably best on this) and the 70-200 is probably the most useful, although for climbing the wides come into their own. Other points: get the battery grips - they treble battery life, fish-eys have been done to death IMHO and I try to avoid, and no-one, under any circumstance, should get a kit lens.
A |