new lens?
- Started
- Last post
- 43 Responses
- Boompapa0
I have a 24-70mm F2.8, but I use my 85mm F1.8 way more...
I think it depends on your style. If you like to be in close and you don't mind moving yourself around to get your framing, I'd go with the 85mm. The good thing about the 85mm is you can get close shots without being right in your model's face. It helps to have a little comfort zone of distance.
If I could go back, I'd get the 24-105mm. And if I had the $$$, I'd upgrade my 85mm to the F1.2 in a second.
- cruddlebub0
i'd love to get a 5dmk ii or iii, and a wedge of L lens's...
there are lens's out there that are as close to the L's as you can get without spending thousands.
its all about the glass. a body with a shit lens on will take naff pics in comparison to the other way round... not sure why anyone would put a shit lens on a expensive body to be fair...
if it weren't for the house needing thousands of pounds worth of work doing to it then i'd be hunting for new gear!!
bloody house...
- on crop sensors the 10-22 is equal to the 16-35 on full frame, but the image is clearer on 16-35albums
- JamesBoynton0
Second hand 20-45 2.8L can be picked up within budget.
- autoflavour0
I recently upgraded my body to a 5D mk III.. and all of a sudden my lenses have opened up a whole new world of versatility for me.
the 16-35 L is as wide as my old Sigma wide angle and the 24-70L is finally wide enough to be an every purpose lens.. albeit making the camera crazy heavy.
but the image quality is fucking amazing, straight off the camera no processing.. and with a small amount of finessing, its next level shit.
anyone who tells you L glass isnt worth the cash.. hasnt used one, or cant afford one and are just lying
- whereRI0
i bought a canon 24-70 L 2.8 and have not changed lenses since.
i had to go through some bidding wars online as I aint dropping the cash on the insanely expensive new ones, but i highly recommend it if you can get your mits on one- cripes they're massive and heavy aren't they? Just had a play with one mounted on a 5Dhans_glib
- the combination weighed a ton - and it hardly makes for a wieldy unithans_glib
- nice lens though.hans_glib
- yeah i like the heavy, new ones are lighter if you have the money.whereRI
- they are indeed heavy... especially the 70-200
cruddlebub
- cruddlebub0
i now own a sigma 70-200mm 2.8f and a sigma 17-50mm 2.8f.
both are sharp and quick... great lens for their respective prices.
the 70-200 i got deeert cheap! the 17-50 i bought new.
- albums0
85mm, i hate my 28, i never use it.
- vaxorcist0
ok... the EOS 17-55 is nice, and for weddings cool... get a 580ex for weddings, and learn to bounce flash...
the Sigma 70-200 might be recalibrated, but in my experience, sigma's for Nikon seemed to be more likely to accurately focus than sigma's for Canon, even if re-calibrated...
If the Sigma is IS/VR/whatever-they-call vibration reduction, it may be worth $$ to try recalibration, as a 70-200 F2.8 with vibration reduction is a wedding photographer's goldmine lens....
Otherwise, I'd get a 85 1.8 or at least a 50 1.8 as you need some sort of low-light F1.8 semi-telephoto for a wedding.... and a backup body, annother 40D is pretty cheap....
Have fun doing weddings.... it's most fun as a second shooter, you don't have to take responsiblity for Everything....
- cruddlebub0
ok ok ok, so it's been a while and things have changed, i'm wanting the canon 17-55mm fixed 2.8F. i'm thinking of going into doing some weddings and other bits and pieces, have a job on friday just shooting a restaurant and the flat above it.
i have been given a sigma 70-200 but it needs re-calibrating. then im not sure if to keep it or sell it.
- vaxorcist0
The EOS 24mm F2.8 is optically pretty good but slightly buzzy AF.... slightly more barrel distortion than I'd like... it's an old-school lens that hasn't been updated. Try it! But I do like the view from it, and the simpleness of shooting with one prime.
The 24 1.4 L canon is nice, but not as sharp in the edges as the 35 1.4 L.... the 28 1.8 USM Canon is fast to focus but not that sharp, however it's slight creaminess can be nice for weddings...
- cruddlebub0
yeah i am swinging more towards the 24mm... like you say would probably be limited with the 85, and already have a 50mm.
- Arild0
I'm only using fixed focal lengths, always preferred it, I find them sharper and fit my working methods better. Zoom lenses might be practical for action photography though.
Nikkor's 24, 35 and 50mm (all f1.4) are part of my setup. Available from Canon as well I'm sure. If you're willing to step down from the f1.4 models (they are a bit pricy, overall much better though) the focal lengths are available as cheaper models too.
I'd go for the 24mm and invest in the 85mm later on as it's a great length that one too, and very sharp (at least the f1.4 model) but the 85mm is less versatile in my experience.
Suggest you try them out first... you might totally disagree with me :)
- 85mm is a neat focal length for portrait closeups ... it all depends what you're focusing on I guess.Arild
- registe0
http://www.mifsuds.com/acatalog/…
Used Canon EF 24-85mm F3.5/4.5 USM Price: £179.00it's this:
http://www.42photo.com/pd-produc…b&h is out of stock
- cruddlebub0
b&h? i can use manual but am slow with it, auto is a great help!
- registe0
if it were me, i'd get the 85, i have the 28, i like tele more so than wide the more i shoot i think.
if you're are the brave type there are both a 28mm and an 85mm, both manual, in the used store at b&h right now, for low prices. I won't though, I need autofocus.
- http://www.bhphotovi…
http://www.bhphotovi…registe - yeah i live in the uk, import tax and the like...cruddlebub
- ah sorryregiste
- thanks anyways chap!cruddlebub
- http://www.bhphotovi…
- cruddlebub0
thanks man, i was in dreamland thinking of being able to own a L lens, and more than likely never will, i don't mind buying used gear, as long as its been looked after.... my 40d isn't worth a huge amount, but i am really happy with it.
but would like a new lens, as in new for me!...
- registe0
lenses are a matter of inspiration, it doesn't matter how much you spend on one, what matters is how much you use one. if you're inspired to go shoot all over the place with a 50mm ƒ/1.8 by all means get out there and do so.
You don't need L lenses to enjoy photography. These things only come in handy later after you have matured and understand the benefits of such expensive glass, therefore how to optimize it.
It is very possible to spend under $1000 on a body and lenses to get very high quality results considering crop sensor camera & lens prices. I've never minded buying used, most photographers are neurotic about their gear, I know I am.