Lenses????

Jarckivy

Hello to all,

I have asked this question before but a good bit ago. I have been reading alot and was wanting some advice from some of you.

I have the 400D and the 50D for my bodies and the 28-135, 50 1.8,18-55 and the 75-300. Pretty much all kit lenses besides the 1.8.

Here are my choices and my budget- about $2000..
-17-55
-sell the 1.8 and get the 50 1.4
-85 1.8
-24-105 F4
-100 Macro
-70-200 2.8 IS

My choice I was going to pick were the 17-55, 24-105 and the 85 1.8. I usually rent the 70-200 2.8IS and the 17-55 for the other weddings I have done.

I would like to sell all the lenses I already have.

Half of my weddings this year are in churches, so I'm worried about the light.

Sorry for such a long post, I am just wanting to get the most out of my budget....:)

SittingElf

If your focus is low light and weddings etc.. you can't go wrong with the 85mm 1.8, It's an awesome inexpensive lens, and if was fully weatherpoofed, I'd guess it would be an "L" lens. With your 1.6 sensor, it will shoot at the equivalent of a 135mm. (Roughly $350)

I also have the 100 L Macro which is also a tack-sharp lens. Can't speak for the earlier 100 non "L" Macro. (The L is about $1000)

The 24-105 F/4L is my primary walkaround lens, and it is a very functional and useful that pretty much lives on my 5D in the bag... but it's pricey.

Jarckivy

SittingElf wrote:

If your focus is low light and weddings etc.. you can't go wrong with the 85mm 1.8, It's an awesome inexpensive lens, and if was fully weatherpoofed, I'd guess it would be an "L" lens. With your 1.6 sensor, it will shoot at the equivalent of a 135mm. (Roughly $350)

I also have the 100 L Macro which is also a tack-sharp lens. Can't speak for the earlier 100 non "L" Macro. (The L is about $1000)

The 24-105 F/4L is my primary walkaround lens, and it is a very functional and useful that pretty much lives on my 5D in the bag... but it's pricey.

So you think I shouldn't go for the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 17-55. And try to go for the 85 1.8, 100 Macro and the 24-105...This is so hard for me, because I would like to get the most I can get but also get the best.....

SittingElf

Jarckivy wrote:

So you think I shouldn't go for the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 17-55. And try to go for the 85 1.8, 100 Macro and the 24-105...This is so hard for me, because I would like to get the most I can get but also get the best.....

No doubt the 70-200 IS is a staple in canon lenses, but you'd be better off I think going to the "L" model of that lens by saving for it for purchase later. If you bought it now, you'd probably just want to upgrade before long. (There is a new II iteration of the lens being brought out by Canon shortly, but it's going to be prohibitively expensive... (around $2500), the current original "L"'s in the lineup will probably be available used for really decent prices before too long, and they are awesome.

Personally, I held off on that lens specifically to wait for the II model (though my credit card will suffer!!)

Sam

Jennifer,

Take a few minutes (or more ) and look at what focal lengths you use the most. This will help you with your choices.

Prime lenses will I think give you the best quality for the money. Zooms will give you the best versatility, but at a premium.

As a wedding photographer I would always buy the fast glass. Although more expensive, fast glass provides more options for low light and for creative DOF.

If you think you may want to get a full frame camera body you will want to consider this when making your lens choices.

Another thought for the future would be a camera body with better high ISO performance.

The 24-105 f4 (I have this lens) is a great walk around lens on a full frame body, but I think a tad long on a cropped body and a little slow for wedding work.

The 85 1.8 (I have) is a sharp lens for a very reasonable price.

I don't seem to use 50mm focal length very much.

My 70-200mm 2.8 IS is one of my best lenses.

Canon makes a EF-S 17-55mm 2.8 IS that is very nice.

Good luck,

Sam

Jarckivy

Sam wrote:

Jennifer,

Take a few minutes (or more ) and look at what focal lengths you use the most. This will help you with your choices.

Prime lenses will I think give you the best quality for the money. Zooms will give you the best versatility, but at a premium.

As a wedding photographer I would always buy the fast glass. Although more expensive, fast glass provides more options for low light and for creative DOF.

If you think you may want to get a full frame camera body you will want to consider this when making your lens choices.

Another thought for the future would be a camera body with better high ISO performance.

The 24-105 f4 (I have this lens) is a great walk around lens on a full frame body, but I think a tad long on a cropped body and a little slow for wedding work.

The 85 1.8 (I have) is a sharp lens for a very reasonable price.

I don't seem to use 50mm focal length very much.

My 70-200mm 2.8 IS is one of my best lenses.

Canon makes a EF-S 17-55mm 2.8 IS that is very nice.

Good luck,

Sam

Sam

Thanks for the suggestions. I know I want the 17-55. I was just torn between spending the rest on the 70-200 2.8 IS or getting the 100 Macro and the 85 1.8 or the 24-105 and the 85 1.8 or 100 Macro.

I have 15 weddings booked for this year and I am so tired of renting gear. With about 6 of them being in churches, I guess I should lean more towards the 70-200 and the 17-55...

JohnBiggs

Absolutely get the existing 70-200 2.8 IS.... There is no reason not to and you already say you rent it.

The 24-105 F4 is too slow for church lighting.

JohnBiggs

Ohh and if you are planing on the 100macro I'd just do the 135 f2 instead. If you are going prime then get faster than 2.8.

Jarckivy

JohnBiggs wrote:

Ohh and if you are planing on the 100macro I'd just do the 135 f2 instead. If you are going prime then get faster than 2.8.

Thanks John. I think I'm just going to go ahead and get the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 17-55. I will also check out the 135 F2.

I have been looking on Ebay, Adorama and B&H. Do you have any other places that you buy from and trust?

ARKreations

Jarckivy wrote:

I have been looking on Ebay, Adorama and B&H. Do you have any other places that you buy from and trust?

Have a look at KEH

Scott_Quier

I successfully shot weddings using the combination of the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM and the 20-200 f/2.8L IS USM. I would have to agree with something jeffreaux2 has posted a couple of times .... it's entirely possible to shoot an entire wedding with just the 17-55. On more than one occassion, I have shot weddings where I've used the longer zoom only because it was there - could have almost as easily done the job with just the shorter lens.

With respect to the EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM - this is a great walk-around lens (I have it, love it), especially on a full-frame camera but it's a bit slower and a bit longer than other choices. The f/4 maximum aperture is not a solution of choice in dark venues, especially on cameras with lacking AF functionality (the 400D and the 50D both qualify). As for the length of the lens, I've used it on a 50D in well-lit venues (so AF wasn't an issue) and found it to be a bit long.

JohnBiggs

Jarckivy wrote:

I have been looking on Ebay, Adorama and B&H. Do you have any other places that you buy from and trust?

I have great luck with amazon. I subscribe to their free 2-day shipping plan and it saves me a ton in annual shipping charges.

form

I don't do churches the same way - I use fast primes only (currently 35L and 85L) for the processionals, and I avoid using flash. For the slow parts of the ceremony, I will use the 70-200 f/2.8 IS for some things, the 85L for others, and anything else that fits for a few extra shots like environmentals with wide/ultrawide.

There are lots of photographers who successfully do the church ceremonies with f/2.8 lenses...however, they either have ISO12800 or they use flash. You can't do a processional with f/2.8 without motion blur if you don't use flash or massively high ISOs.

Actually, I use the 35 and 85 throughout 95% of the day. But, I'm using original 5D's so the focal length is different.

The 24L or 35L would be a good lens for crop cameras during processionals, if you don't use flash.

HelenOster

Message from Helen at Adorama Camera

Jarckivy wrote:

Thanks John. I think I'm just going to go ahead and get the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 17-55. I will also check out the 135 F2.

I have been looking on Ebay, Adorama and B&H. Do you have any other places that you buy from and trust?

If you are thinking about used lenses, email me for a guide to selecting used lenses - problems to look out for, etc.
(I can't post it on the forum because I can't remember how I came by it, so wouldn't be able to credit the author)

JohnBiggs

HelenOster wrote:

If you are thinking about used lenses, email me for a guide to selecting used lenses - problems to look out for, etc.
(I can't post it on the forum because I can't remember how I came by it, so wouldn't be able to credit the author)

I'm not trying to be an a$$.....

But no matter how you share it, it's still a copyright violation. Sometimes photographers are the biggest whiners when it's their photos being passed around on the nets, but when it comes to others copyrights deal

anyways. I've had great luck typing a random sentence from an article or guide into google and quickly finding the source. Maybe if you find the source you can just link to it and everyone is happy.

Art Scott

As a wedding photog that has used exclusivly zooms for over 25+ yrs....I would suggest the 70-200f.8 and something in the way of a sigma 17-70f2.8-4 or another brand like canon 17-55.....as for the macro side....save some $ and get an extension tube set to add to your current lens unless your wanting the macro lens for wedding shots then something like the sigma 70-200 macro would serve you well............but then I have been shooting Sigma for over 25+ yrs also.......I am just now starting to pick up Nikon lenses in focal lengths that were all SIGMA in the past.......

Jarckivy

Thanks to everyone that has given me great advice. Arkreation, I went ahead and purchased a Canon 17-55 from K.E.H. Thanks for the tip.

Now I just need to save a tad bit more for my 70-200 2.8 IS....It feels wonderful to finally start my collection of great glass!!! Now I just need to sell all the kit lenses...

Shima

Jarckivy wrote:

Thanks to everyone that has given me great advice. Arkreation, I went ahead and purchased a Canon 17-55 from K.E.H. Thanks for the tip.

Now I just need to save a tad bit more for my 70-200 2.8 IS....It feels wonderful to finally start my collection of great glass!!! Now I just need to sell all the kit lenses...

Those two lenses make a great start for zoom lens in wedding photography, good choice!