Which should I go for?

canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
edited September 24, 2007 in Cameras
I am wanting to take close up photos like portraits and wide angle shots say 20 to 30' away in a room that may not be well lit. I have a Canonon400d but I am definately getting the 40D in the near future. I have been told about the 17-55mm lens and the 24-70mm 2.8 lens which should I go for to give me all I want in one room without having to change lenses.
Thanks once again for all your help.
Bob
Dumfries & Galloway
Scotland

Comments

  • kini62kini62 Registered Users Posts: 441 Major grins
    edited September 22, 2007
    You want to take close up portraits from 20-30'? Or just be able to get a group shot from 20-30'?

    For the former you'll need a 70-200 for the latter the 17-55 would be best.

    Gene

    canon400d wrote:
    I am wanting to take close up photos like portraits and wide angle shots say 20 to 30' away in a room that may not be well lit. I have a Canonon400d but I am definately getting the 40D in the near future. I have been told about the 17-55mm lens and the 24-70mm 2.8 lens which should I go for to give me all I want in one room without having to change lenses.
    Thanks once again for all your help.
    Bob
    Dumfries & Galloway
    Scotland
  • windozewindoze Registered Users Posts: 2,830 Major grins
    edited September 22, 2007
    canon400d wrote:
    I am wanting to take close up photos like portraits and wide angle shots say 20 to 30' away in a room that may not be well lit. I have a Canonon400d but I am definately getting the 40D in the near future. I have been told about the 17-55mm lens and the 24-70mm 2.8 lens which should I go for to give me all I want in one room without having to change lenses.
    Thanks once again for all your help.
    Bob
    Dumfries & Galloway
    Scotland


    Go to the camera store and see the difference between 17 mm and 24 mm on a 1.6 crop camera. I know a few photogs who have said they wish for wider when using the 24-70. I bet you go for the 17-55 IS.
  • canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
    edited September 23, 2007
    windoze wrote:
    Go to the camera store and see the difference between 17 mm and 24 mm on a 1.6 crop camera. I know a few photogs who have said they wish for wider when using the 24-70. I bet you go for the 17-55 IS.

    Thanks for all your help and I am sure I will go for the 17-55. As you know I am a complete amateur, so can you please explain what is a 1.6 crop camera?
    Thanks
    Bob
  • boulderNardoboulderNardo Registered Users Posts: 180 Major grins
    edited September 24, 2007
    Here's my 2cents... :)
    I just bought the 17-55 2.8 IS and have had the chance to use it at a (outdoors) wedding this weekend. I had not had the chance to try it before buying it, whereas I did try the 24-70 2.8L which was the other option I was considering.

    My experience so far - 17mm, even on a crop-body, is slightly too wide for a general walk-around / wedding photography lens (at least for an outdoors wedding). I was really impressed by how wide 17mm is, even on 1.6x crop, and honestly rarely went below 22mm at the very widest.

    On the other hand, 55mm is just a little too short, even on a crop body :D
    I sometimes wished I had that extra reach so that I wouldn't have to change to my 70-200.

    I'll see if I can post some sample pictures from the 17-55 once I go through them. In any way - I'll keep the 17-55 a few more weeks, use it in various situations, try some architecture photography, but I'm already very very inclined to trade it for a 24-70 L which will be complemented by a 10-22 for the real wide architectural stuff.

    Hope this helps!
    Bernardo
    Canon 1D MkII, Canon 17-40 f/4L, Canon 70-200 f/2.8L, Canon 50 f/1.4, Canon 100 f/2
    Bogen 055XPROB
    Elinchrom Ranger RX Speed AS, FreeLite A, Skyports, 3x Vivitar 285HV
Sign In or Register to comment.