How to justify....
cdonovan
Registered Users Posts: 724 Major grins
ok, so it's time, I know it's time and I have the funds to tell me it's time, but I really need some common business sense to push me over the edge.
I am a part time photog right now my busiest time is the summer because I cover equine events. I have had a lot of people excited about my work, and have done really well. I have been named the OP at a number of events locally (within a 45 min drive) and it's also taken me out of province about 5 hour drive. I do private farm calls portraits and weddings as well when I have the time.
I'm also a single mom working another full time job(which I hate!!).
But because of being the bread winner I can't just give up a steady income to persue this, I have gone to part time hours when I can, my full time job is very demanding as well.
The part that is hanging me up is how can I justify spending the money on the lens, before buying other things for me or my son. My wardrobe could use a good over haul, I could lay better flooring at the house, I could invest the money in my sons college etc etc etc etc
How can I justify that going from a tamron 70-300 4.8 macro lens to a Canon 70-200 2.8 IS USM lens? Will the quality of my pictures increase that dramatically that people will notice a difference? Will I be able to command more $$ from my show shots? Charge more for farm visits?
I've read the comparisons and know that it's going to be a difference in the quality product, I'm just wondering if it's really a good move, or am I more interested in standing out in a crowd with my white lens??:wink
I am a part time photog right now my busiest time is the summer because I cover equine events. I have had a lot of people excited about my work, and have done really well. I have been named the OP at a number of events locally (within a 45 min drive) and it's also taken me out of province about 5 hour drive. I do private farm calls portraits and weddings as well when I have the time.
I'm also a single mom working another full time job(which I hate!!).
But because of being the bread winner I can't just give up a steady income to persue this, I have gone to part time hours when I can, my full time job is very demanding as well.
The part that is hanging me up is how can I justify spending the money on the lens, before buying other things for me or my son. My wardrobe could use a good over haul, I could lay better flooring at the house, I could invest the money in my sons college etc etc etc etc
How can I justify that going from a tamron 70-300 4.8 macro lens to a Canon 70-200 2.8 IS USM lens? Will the quality of my pictures increase that dramatically that people will notice a difference? Will I be able to command more $$ from my show shots? Charge more for farm visits?
I've read the comparisons and know that it's going to be a difference in the quality product, I'm just wondering if it's really a good move, or am I more interested in standing out in a crowd with my white lens??:wink
0
Comments
Only you can decide whether to spend the $1500 on the lens, clothes, floor, etc.--tough decision.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
One word of warning. Being a woman... I don't know what kind of arm strength and endurance you have. The 70-200/2.8L IS (and non is) is A BEAST. I know these horse shows go on for like 8 hours+ some days. You may have a hard time handholding that long. The 70-200/4L is EXTREMELY light in comparison and is just as much a winner. You're probably going to be shooting at f/5.6+ for events anyways to get the horse and rider in focus... but the 2.8L is nice for when it gets dark and it comes down to wide open or pack your bags and go home. My fiancee cannot shoot with my XTi, 2.8L and battery grip... its too heavy for her to use smoothly.
so plan on like $60-75 for a nice UV filter...and plan on another ~$150-200 for a 1.4x extended for those big jumper arenas!
Oh... and the money that you'll be spending? Write it off!!! Instead of paying uncle sam taxes for the income you make on that 1099 MISC form, have him pay you for all the toys you deducted to get your business off the ground
nothing wrong with that... especially when you are trying to get noticed.
Penny was shooting with a 75-300 USM III and I was using the 70-300IS. We made a lot of money with these lenses, but it was difficult at times because I limited penny to 70-200 and f/8 on that lens. Some shots were soft and proofing was difficult. Now with the L lenses... proofing is usually MUCH easier and I feel great about offering a heck of a lot sharper images.
I have the moula in a bank account just waiting to go, and realized when I was doing my taxes last year that spending on the business was a very very good idea!:D
I have heard that about the added weight of the lens sirsloop and am positive that I'll be able to hold up. I have debated going with or without the IS and after using one that a friend had, I think it's a necessity for me. I use my 70-300 now pretty well all the time unless I am inside, and then I even use it then sometimes, so although I know that isn't conventional use normally of the lens, I plan to use this one just as much.
Should I worry about going from a 300 to a 200 focal range?
I'm not worried about carrying my artistic ability over, I get excited to think of how much more this is going to allow me or open up possibilities especially with the IS...I've lost a lot of photos in the past with camera shake, or just trying to do something that the lens prohibited me from doing, hand held with little light.
I am debating between the sigma 70-300 and the canon 70-200. But I read that review posted recently about the L series and I'm really thinking that "luxury" is the way I wanna go!
Keep convincing me pretty please!!!
Well, biggest issue I had was those 70-300's is they were really soft wide open. That means at f/4-5.6 you're not getting sharp photos. You need to be stopped down to like f/7.1-f/8 to get it sharp. Shooting f/8 you're going to struggle to get 1/500 sec shutter speed on an overcast day, even at iso800 if its in late in the afternoon. I like shooting horses at f/5.6 and a 70-200/?L is both the perfect length and silly sharp at that aperture. You also have the option to open it up further if need be. Difference between f/2.8 and f/8 as far as shutter speed is tremendous! You're packing your bags at f/8 cause you are shooting 1/250th where as you are still shooting 1/2000th over at f/2.8. Its 8 times less light you can shoot in.
As far as the camera shake... when I was shooting with the 70-300's I would struggle to maintain 1/500th. Once you get down to like 1/320th you're right on the edge with motion blur from both the subject and the camera at 300... keeper rate drops. If you are enjoying a full stop or two or three bigger aperture, there's no motion blur. I can jerk the camera around, shoot a shot over my shoulder at 1/1250th and it'll be dead still simply because of shutter speed.
And the 300 to 200 range drop... its not really a drop because you can always toss on a teleconverter and get back to 280mm without any noticeable image quality loss. If light starts to die down just yank the TC and crop the photos.
how and I doing??
Really well, I feel a happy update to this thread in the very near future
As far as the weight, I think you can handle it. I grew up riding horses and have the arm strength to show for it. I've handheld my old 80-200 2.8L (HEAVY) 20D and battery grip for 10 hours straight, 2 days in a row at a Firefighters event. My arms were dangling on the following day though, but if I can do it you can too.
If you've got the money now, go for the L lens!
** Feel free to edit my photos if you see room for improvement.**
Use what talents you possess: the woods would be very silent if
no birds sang there except those that sang best.
~Henry Van Dyke
There is a famailure old maxim in the business world. "You have to spend money to make money." Let your business decide on what you do. Will your business support the cost of a 70-200 f2.8L. Will you business likely to improve/increase from this purchase. If yes, there is not a lot to think about. If no, well I think that it speaks for itself as well.
No matter what your skill level, you can't make 1000 bolts in one hour on a machine that produces 500 bolts an hour. If you have reached the boundries of the equipment that you currently have you either stay as you are or improve your equipment. Only you can make that choice.
It should be here on Tuesday:uhoh :yikes
So much for trying to support local business, I called local dealers and they were going to charge me right out of the book prices, $3000 CAD paid upfront, no return refunds. 3 weeks for delivery.
Bought it from Vistek instead of B&H only because of the duties and import fees...which are impossible to calculate until you actually are bringing it across the boarder!:gun2
Wouldn't leave home without mine. Although I really like its backup too, the 70-200 f4L (without IS), the 2.8 IS is in a class by itself.
Galleries here Upcoming Ranch/Horse Workshop
The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS is the lens which I would choose if I concentrated on any type of sports photography. The reason I would choose this lens over an f/4L is two-fold: the f/2.8 gives that extra stop of speed for low light conditions and the f/2.8 aperture can really isolate the subject from the background. It might take a while to get used to shooting at wide apertures but the great AF capability of the 70-200mm f/2.8L will allow you to shoot at a large aperture and to really isolate the riders. Of course, you might need a smaller aperture in order to get both horse and rider in focus.
I opted for the 70-200mm f/4L IS lens instead of the f/2.8L IS model because I use this lens for all sorts of venues (only very ocasionally for sports) and carry it with me all the time. I have even designated a separate body for the lens so that it is immediately available for use. The lighter weight is the reason I chose the f/4L IS model but, Is I said earlier - if I were wanting to shoot horse shows (or any other sports event) as a primary subject - I would have chosen the f/2.8L.
You can use a Canon 1.4x TC to give you a 280mm f/4 lens with outstanding image quality.
I would seriously think about getting a monopod. The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS lens is relatively heavy and could really benefit from the support of a monopod. I use a Manfrotto 681 monopod but, do not recommend that model for a female unless she has very large hands. The grip diameter of the 681 is quite large.
I am sure that you, after using your previous lens, are going to be blown away by the image quality of the f/2.8L IS and, most importantly, so will your customers.
By the way, the L lens comes with a lens hood but, I replaced that hood with a screw-in metal hood which is smaller and fits more securely. They are very inexpensive on eBay. I also use an OPTECH Hood Hat in lieu of a lens cap. It provides greater protection and is easier to get on and off.
http://optechusa.com/product/detail/?PRODUCT_ID=16&PRODUCT_SUB_ID=&CATEGORY_ID=13
Also, if you are not going to use a monopod, please think of buying an aftermarket ergonomically designed strap: either the E-Z Comfort by Optech or the Boomerang by Tamrac. Your neck and back will thank you for this reasonably priced accessory.
http://optechusa.com/product/detail/?PRODUCT_ID=9&PRODUCT_SUB_ID=&CATEGORY_ID=4
http://www.tamrac.com/g_camerastraps.htm