To get something with a stabilizer is going to be outside of your budget so I shouldn't worry about that at this stage.
The 55-200 is ok - is exactly the same quality as your kit lens - but I didn't like it so I upgraded to the 70-200 f4 L.
If your looking at doing weddings I wouldn't go for a 200mm (which equates to 320mm in your canon) but go for something shorter and faster. I have a Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 EX DG (£214) which I bought for indoor use at horseshows. Theres also a 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG Macro version (£278). I'll dig out some pictures later & post them.
One of the favourites with wedding photographers atm seems to be the canon EF24-105mm f4 L IS but its not cheap (£650). Have a read of the Canon Lens forum at www.dpreview.com.
Yes, I have come to the conclusion that a focal length of 300mm is not necessary for my main use and would also require a tripod, I like to work in a more free flowing style at Weddings. The reason I would want something up to 200mm is so I can zoom in on the details of people chatting etc without hoverng over them, and also get the detail of peoples faces when seated for the ceremony etc. I already own and Canon 18-55mm.
The 70-200 f4 L. looks like a fantastic lense and gets consistantly excellant reviews but is just way out of my price threshold.... maybe someday ; )
I am little confused now as to what to go for!!
I think you shouldn't look for just one lens. I got a sigma 17-35, a 28-135 and a 70-300 lens. As you can see i got a long range to cover. I'm looking for a 500 or so lens, but that's really pricy and not what you're asking....
Maybe go for a lens for wide angle range because you're dealing with the 1,6 (what's it called again in English?) so the 17 equals the 28 and the 135 equals the 180 (give and take a few)....
I wouldn't say there's a "wedding" lens because there isn't any! Just try to look for the range you need and maybe buy later another lens that has more range or wider angle.
What Hermie is saying is that the effective focal length of the lens is not as it states because the 30d has a less than full frame sensor.
What this means is that the 70-200 lens is truely that on a 35mm film camera or a full frame digital (like the 5d). The smaller sensor in the 30d means you have to multiply the focal length by 1.6 to get the 35mm equivalent. So on the 30d the 70-200 is actually 112-320.
The 24-70 I suggested above would be 38-112 on the 30d. The image quality of the Sigma EX lenses is not far behind the canon L's.
A couple of other options in the same range would be Canon EF28-105mm f3.5-4.5 (£175) or canon EF28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS (£295). The second one has the image stabiliser built in so you're effectivly gaining an fstop.
For a comparative review of some of the options have a look at http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html#canon
Ok thats fantastic and really sheds some light into what I would actually require, your help is greatly appreciated!! I may very well have a look at the 24-70mm in more detail....I
I've popped a couple of pics online taken with my 28-70 which may give you an idea relative to what you may want to do.
I scaled them down a bit to make them easier to load but other than the last one are straight out the camera.
[Edited on 22/5/2007 by Hardy]
Hardy, boo, your links aren't working. I want to see.
Ok I have been offered a chance to purchase a Canon EF28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS lense what sort of price do these normally go for second hand?? I have been having a play with it and it certainly seems a suitable option for weddings etc......
Ffordes have one for £219 - can't quickly find any more second hand ones! New they are £295.
Hopefully the links work now Skeptic