ManuelG

I have a Canon Rebel XTi camera, I got as a gift last year. I travel alot and I like to take nice pictures around the city.I have read some reviews also about lenses and some people recommend EF 17-40mm f/4L USM and EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM..... is there any particular lens you could recommend me??I also will use it for city landscapes, portrait, indoors, family reunions. I dont need a zoom lens, because I already have one.for example, I will use it to take pictures at a city downtown, parks, attractions, museums, landscapes, buildings, people, etc...

Kislaw

Though I haven't tried those two, I have been using a 28-70mm lens on my Canon EOS for years and I the pictures are ALWAYS awesome. I guess it's technically a zoom lens, but it's a pretty small one compared to my other zoom. I first used it to memorialize life in Japan for a year, but I have used it for almost a decade beyond that for all vacation and snapshot purposes. My mom bought me a compact digital camera last year, and though I would love to be less weighed down, I just can't bear to use it because the pictures are crap compared to my Canon EOS.

Antoni

of the 2 you mention the 17-40 will be far more useful more often, if i could take only one zoom i would take somehing like a 28-135mm or 17-85mm - sorry to confuse thingsa

gretsch16pc

First of all if you purchased your XTi as a kit with a standard lens...55-85 for an example, that is a zoom. Any lens with a set of numbers like that or 17-40 and 10-22 are also zooms with a different magnification. So with that out of the way your standard lens will cover st of your general photography, like your family, indoor shots. If you want a wide angle zoom for landscapes go with the 10-22 (35mm equiv. 16-35).I own a Tamron 18-250 f/3.5 Macro zoom and it is used for about 90% of my work, my Canon 50mm f/1.4 is what I use for Portrait work where I want everything out of focus except for my subject.Canon XTiCanon 50mmCanon 580 EX IITamron 18-250

CaptainExplorer

The Canon Rebel XTi has a lens multiplication factor of 1.6x -- meaning every lens must be multiplied using that factor to get their true focal length with that camera. Canon's 10—22mm on the Rebel is the equivalent of a 16—35mm lens on a full frame camera. Their 17—40mm has the equivalent of a 27—64mm. Portrait lenses are generally anything longer then what is considered "normal," which is between 43 and 50mm for a full frame 35mm camera. The actual focal length would be 43.3mm. Therefore, a 50mm lens is only, in theory, the very minimal for a portrait lens. Portrait lens need to be used properly to best show a persons face, and the shorter the lens the fatter the face while the longer lenses thin faces. Also, the physical distance between camera and subject for a portrait with a 50mm lens is too close making the nose appear larger and the ears smaller. This is even more pronounced using wider lenses. Generally, portrait lenses range between 60mm and 180mm, and used wide open at their largest aperture setting which gives a very limited depth-of-focus -- as oppose to depth-of-field which only comes into play as the lens is stopped down to smaller aperture openings like ƒ8, ƒ11, ƒ16, and ƒ22. At those aperture you are dealing with depth-of-field -- not focus. Last, the workhorse fixed focal length lens for most, if not all, photojournalist was either a 28 or 35mm. The reason is because an image from those lenses printed on an 8x10 full image print looked normal, but anything wider took on a strange look. A 28 or 35mm lens sees what you see with both eyes open. The Canon EF 17—40mm ƒ4.0 is your best choice; however, their 16—35mm ƒ2.8L II is much better -- except for the price. If you an afford any of Canon's "L" series lenses -- they are worth the price, especially the fast "L" series. You "do" need a zoom lens, a good zoom lens, as long as it was manufactured by a prime lens manufacturer. The "heart" of every camera is the lens.

vienna2001

Do you want to take wide angle shots or less-wide angle shots? That should answer your question.