a question for serious photogs (lenses)

sthig · April 24, 2006

Hi there,

I've started a savings plan to buy particular lenses to cover a wide series of focal lengths for my year long stay in Puebla, Mexico.

The main thing I intend on shooting is landscapes and street photography. I love taking nature photos and will snap birds and such when I can however I know you need to drop around 6k to get a series nature lens...and I am not aiming for that right now.

Knowing what I'm going for, here is what I have in my bag right now:

20d and a 300d backup
17-40 L
24-70 L
50 mm 1.4
50 mm 2.5 macro (with life size extender -- I take macro shots every now and then...nothing I'm focusing on usually).
85 mm 1.8
Sigma 70-200 with 2x extender on it
430 speedlite
and a plethora of accessories/diffusers/filters...

I have considered getting the 35L and 135 L but I don't know whether that is redundant or not. Oh, and "no" I'm not that interested in the 10-22. I know it's great but the 17-40 serves it's purpose well for me.

Knowing that I'm mostly interested in taking street, portrait, landscape, and "walkabout" pictures...what other lens(es) would you recommend? Or am I at a good point with everything now? It's not like I NEED another lens, mind you, I just put away part of my paycheck each time I get paid as a saving accounts towards cam equipment.

your advice and thoughts are highly appreciated
best,

gluwater · April 24, 2006

Since you are using crop camera I would say go with the 135. Both of these lenses are on my wish list but I cannot justify them yet. I think the 35L is more suited for a Full Frame camera but I have seen people use it for landscapes on a crop sensor. This is a hard choice but since you already have 2 good lenses that cover the 35mm range I would go with the 135 for people shots and walk around lens.

Like you said you really don't need aonther lens but I think haveing the 135 f/2 would be a nice addition if you can afford it.

DanielB · April 24, 2006

i say save up, sell the 300D and get a 5D and use the 20D as a back-up

and maybe upgrade the Sigma 70-200 to Canon just because i'm a brand-wh0re

devbobo · April 24, 2006

DanielB wrote:

i say save up, sell the 300D and get a 5D and use the 20D as a back-up

:nono IR mod your 300D

DanielB · April 24, 2006

devbobo wrote:

:nono IR mod your 300D

:nah sell both and buy 2 5D's and IR mod one... aint that right andy.

Bob Bell · April 24, 2006

The definition of serious my not be as clear as I think

The 135/2 is one of the best lenses optically that canon offers. The F2 gives you a full stop over the 70-200. I am not sure of the optics of the Sigma, but I imagine they are a bit less than Canon so the 135 will give you a big boost when you need it.

The 35/1.4 is close to the 50/1.4 and the 24-70 covers 35mm nicely. So I think the 135 is your better choice.

I think the 20D is capable of a lot of things. If you upgraded your 300D to a 350D you will have the same DigicII chip as the 20D so you can do similar things with ISO.

Hope that helps.

sthig · April 24, 2006

stupid question

IR = Infra Red, right? So I know this is going to sound "oh god what a noob" but...how do you IR your 300d?

5d is on my wishlist.

oh my sigma 70-200 stops to 2.8 and 5.6 with the extender. It's a tad soft, but not enough for me to complain about. That's one reason I'd like the 135L

DanielB · April 24, 2006

sthig wrote:

stupid question

IR = Infra Red, right? So I know this is going to sound "oh god what a noob" but...how do you IR your 300d?

www.maxmax.com infared camera mods. just search for Infared in the search bar here on Dgrin and you'll come up with a ton of examples and such....

5d is on my wishlist.

me too

oh my sigma 70-200 stops to 2.8 and 5.6 with the extender. It's a tad soft, but not enough for me to complain about. That's one reason I'd like the 135L

talking about a 2x? what about a 1.4 extender? that way you'd have 98-280 f/4 covered

sthig · April 24, 2006

1.4 = perhaps so, perhaps so.

MarkM6 · April 25, 2006

Mannnnn that 135L

Bob Bell wrote:

The 135/2 is one of the best lenses optically that canon offers.

If I had $1 every time I read this statement, I would have owned 135L f2 and 35L f2.8 by now.

I think 135L is one awesome lens and price is lower than other L-Series lenses.

wxwax · April 25, 2006

You're pretty much set, except for a fast wide for street work.

Bob Bell · April 25, 2006

MarkM6 wrote:

If I had $1 every time I read this statement, I would have owned 135L f2 and 35L f2.8 by now.

I think 135L is one awesome lens and price is lower than other L-Series lenses.

In the grand scheme of thing the 135L is cheap. The only real alternatives for 135L is the 70-200L which is a few hundred sheckles more

Ric Grupe · April 25, 2006

sthig wrote:

The main thing I intend on shooting is landscapes and street photography.

Knowing that I'm mostly interested in taking street, portrait, landscape, and "walkabout" pictures...what other lens(es) would you recommend? Or am I at a good point with everything now? It's not like I NEED another lens, mind you, I just put away part of my paycheck each time I get paid as a saving accounts towards cam equipment.

your advice and thoughts are highly appreciated
best,

70-300 DO IS, because you never know when you'll want the reach.

Canon 5D with 24-105 f/4L IS lens.:D

Seefutlung · April 25, 2006

If you want a lens that will expand your shooting capabilities ... then get a Sigma 50-500 (Bigma). As sharp as the 100-400 (Dust Pumper), with greater range, no IS, for a lot less $$$. You will never regret purchasing this lens.

a question for serious photogs (lenses)

Comments