I have just purchased a Canon 20D and am new to digital photography. What is a good lens for mostly wake shots?

70-200f2.8

Or you could save a lot of money and go with the 70-200mm f/4. It depends on your budget.

Russell, can I ask what you paid for the 20D, I just ordered a 40D from B&amp;H should be here next Tuesday, just in time for the Atlanta PWT, stoked <img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" border=0>

I paid 250 with an extra battery and an extra memory card. Pretty stoked myself. <BR>And thank you Joe and Eubanks.

I'm sorry. 550 not 250.

the 70-200 f2.8 is a really heavy lens and the pics are pretty soft at 2.8 imo. <BR> <BR>either the 70-200 f4 and if you can afford it the 70-200 f4 with IS (really sharp lens and super lightweight)

There's something wrong with your equipment if you can't get anything crisp out of a 70-200 f2.8L.

what scott said..... but i personaly shoot the 70-200 f4L and think its plenty sharp and works well behind the boat. this shot was also wide open at f4 <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/578798.jpg" alt="Upload"> <BR> <BR>(Message edited by wakeeater on May 10, 2008)

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1><b>quote:</b></font><p>By scott a (scott_a) on Saturday, May 10, 2008 - 9:12 am: <BR> <BR>There's something wrong with your equipment if you can't get anything crisp out of a 70-200 f2.8L. <BR> <BR><!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <BR> <BR>x3

i found the lens a bit soft at 2.8... could be operator error..

If you're unhappy with the results then consider sending the lens back to Canon to get it checked out. If it's new then it might be covered under warranty, and if it's old/used then it might be due for a good cleaning and re-calibration anyways. There's always a possibility that you just got a bad copy of the lens.

i tried before i bought.. the 70-200 f4 IS is a killer lens

If you're looking at test charts like the link below the 70-200 f2.8 will show some softness wide open compared to the f4 L IS. It probably doesn't matter in the real world because a shot at f2.8 is impossible obviously with an f4 lens. The real question is whether it's worth the extra $ and the extra weight for the f2.8 if your main focus is shooting wakeboarding. <BR> <BR><a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=103&amp;Camera=9&amp;Sample=0&amp; FLI=4&amp;API=0&amp;LensComp=404&amp;CameraComp=9& amp;SampleComp=0&amp;FLIComp=4&amp;APIComp=0" target="_blank">http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=103&amp;Camera=9&amp;Sample=0&amp; FLI=4&amp;API=0&amp;LensComp=404&amp;CameraComp=9& amp;SampleComp=0&amp;FLIComp=4&amp;APIComp=0</a> <BR> <BR>Notice however that even at f4 (1 stop down) the f2.8L IS is quite up to the level of the f4 L IS. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by richd on May 10, 2008)

we were talking about the 70-200 (non is) ? right ? <BR> <BR>would really suggest what you using it for and what your budget is.. <BR> <BR>i went with the 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f4IS and use the 24-70 for my 2.8 shooting (that lens is was on my camera 80% of the time). <BR> <BR>Both are super sharp lens wide open. the 70-200 f4IS and non f4IS are great zooms for wakeboarding shots. I seriously doubt if you need the 2.8 (IS or non IS ) unless you want to use it for something else. <BR> <BR>please keep in mind i am a newbie and have used the 70-200 f4 (IS and non IS) and the 70-200 f2.8 (non IS).

If you get a 2.8 you can still use a 1.4 or 2.0 teleconverter and still be at 4.0 or 5.6 wide open.