What lens would you get??

Stella Bella

I'm looking to spend $1000-1300 on a Canon L lens (of course less would be nice). I am mostly photographing family, children and pets. Natural light (if I can). And have to be inside, on location for most of the winter.

I've been looking at the 24-70L f/2.8 and the 24-105L f/4. I like the idea of the extra F-stops, but is it worth it?? And would I used the 70-105 a lot or would I be more likely to use the 24-70?? And then would a prime be better?? I'm really like the idea of a zoom, but I really am interested in getting the best lens for the price.

It will be on a 40d if that makes a difference.

Thanks for any advice!

Katherine

Elaine

Stella Bella wrote:

I'm looking to spend $1000-1300 on a Canon L lens (of course less would be nice). I am mostly photographing family, children and pets. Natural light (if I can). And have to be inside, on location for most of the winter.

I've been looking at the 24-70L f/2.8 and the 24-105L f/4. I like the idea of the extra F-stops, but is it worth it?? And would I used the 70-105 a lot or would I be more likely to use the 24-70?? And then would a prime be better?? I'm really like the idea of a zoom, but I really am interested in getting the best lens for the price.

It will be on a 40d if that makes a difference.

Thanks for any advice!

Katherine

Is the 17-55 2.8 IS off the table? I love this lens on my 40D.

EDIT: No, it's not an L, but the IQ is just as good, IMO.

ziggy53

Elaine wrote:

Is the 17-55 2.8 IS off the table? I love this lens on my 40D.

EDIT: No, it's not an L, but the IQ is just as good, IMO.

On a Canon crop 1.6x camera, like the 40D, the 17-55mm range is very important for indoor work. The f2.8 aperture plus IS make it very versatile. This is my most used lens for family events as well as formal events on the 40D body. Coupled with an appropriate flash and flash modifier it is a killer combination.

Scott_Quier

Let me add my vote (FWIW) - the 17-55 f/2.8 IS should be on your list of possibles. I have the 24-105 and find it to be a little long for more than a single person 2/3 portrait. In addition, the additional stop (f/4 to f/2.8) in combination with the IS can really make a difference. Finally, the f/2.8 isn't all about stopping action. It can also allow you to shoot with a narrower DOF if you decide you would like to do so.

For the "primes" question, a combination of the Siggy 30 f/1.4, the EF 50 f/1.4 and the EF 85 f/1.8 would be a sweet collection. Primes will (almost) always deliver sharper images than a zoom and you can always apply a slight blur layer if you get too much sharpness for some of your clients.:D

Stella Bella

Scott_Quier wrote:

Let me add my vote (FWIW) - the 17-55 f/2.8 IS should be on your list of possibles. I have the 24-105 and find it to be a little long for more than a single person 2/3 portrait. In addition, the additional stop (f/4 to f/2.8) in combination with the IS can really make a difference. Finally, the f/2.8 isn't all about stopping action. It can also allow you to shoot with a narrower DOF if you decide you would like to do so.

For the "primes" question, a combination of the Siggy 30 f/1.4, the EF 50 f/1.4 and the EF 85 f/1.8 would be a sweet collection. Primes will (almost) always deliver sharper images than a zoom and you can always apply a slight blur layer if you get too much sharpness for some of your clients.:D

So is this a vote for the 17-55 f/2.8??? (if I went with a zoom)

Man, this is so confusing

Elaine

I'll just add that I shoot wide open with the 17-55 A LOT and it is sharp! For indoors I would definitely consider this lens, because of the 17mm on a 40D and the 2.8 coupled with IS. This is my go-to lens the majority of the time. Love it!

Scott_Quier

Stella Bella wrote:

Scott_Quier wrote:

Let me add my vote (FWIW) - the 17-55 f/2.8 IS should be on your list of possibles. I have the 24-105 and find it to be a little long for more than a single person 2/3 portrait. In addition, the additional stop (f/4 to f/2.8) in combination with the IS can really make a difference. Finally, the f/2.8 isn't all about stopping action. It can also allow you to shoot with a narrower DOF if you decide you would like to do so.

For the "primes" question, a combination of the Siggy 30 f/1.4, the EF 50 f/1.4 and the EF 85 f/1.8 would be a sweet collection. Primes will (almost) always deliver sharper images than a zoom and you can always apply a slight blur layer if you get too much sharpness for some of your clients.:D

So is this a vote for the 17-55 f/2.8??? (if I went with a zoom)

Man, this is so confusing

You asked two questions, I provided two answers.

1) I prefer the 17-55 over the 24-xx in almost all indoor work, mostly for the wide end. And, as stated by Elaine, the 17-55 is stellar, even wide open.
2) Primes may provide you with a "sharper experience" but it ain't all about sharpness.

LiquidAir

Stella Bella wrote:

I've been looking at the 24-70L f/2.8 and the 24-105L f/4. I like the idea of the extra F-stops, but is it worth it?? And would I used the 70-105 a lot or would I be more likely to use the 24-70?? And then would a prime be better?? I'm really like the idea of a zoom, but I really am interested in getting the best lens for the price.

An f/4 lens is not fast enough for ambient light family shots. I got a 24-104 with my 5D and it was only a couple months before I was shopping again for faster glass (I still have my 24-105, but I use it with a flash). Personally I went with primes and I regularly shoot at f/2. However, depending on the environments you shoot in, an f/2.8 zoom may be fast enough.

As for focal lengths, I think you'll find the 17-55 will occasionally leave you wishing for a longer lens and the 24-70 will occasionally leave you wishing for a shorter lens. The IS, however, is worth it. So if you want a zoom, pick up the 17-55/2.8 IS and get an 85/1.8 for a the extra length when you need it.

Tee Why

The 17-55mm would be a good versatile choice, it would let you use slower shutter speeds indoors to prevent noise (assuming that your subjects aren't moving around too much).

If you are interested more in tight headshots, I'd also recommend a Canon 85mm f1.8 or maybe a Canon 50mm f1.4. If you want something along the lines of a 1/2 body shot, maybe a Sigma 30mm f1.4.

The faster primes are smaller/lighter/cheaper and offer a shallower dof when shot wide open. They can also allow faster shutter speeds hence freezing any fast moving kids that a slower lens with an IS won't.

Good luck.