Gettin Ready to dump some dough

mmmatt · April 24, 2007

Hello again all!
I came here last year looking for some advice on shooting a friends daughters wedding. Got a lot of it and many things helped. I will resurect that thread soon to post a few pics as promised, but for now looking for a bit of feedback on a bank breaking purchase I'm about to make.

To give a little background, the wedding I shot was not nearly the sucess I had hoped for... the customer was far more pleased than I however and all is good for them. Specifically, I blew a few of the formals which totally broke my heart... more on that when I pull up the other thread. It has taken me this long to eat crow with you guys, but I really want to be a part of this community so I am going to do it... too much knowlege here to be wasted on a pride issue.
Despite the issues on some of the photographs, I really enjoyed the work. I mean I REALLY enjoyed it. So much so that I have deceided to change careers. I am currently a photo student at MATC in Milwaukee, and I am loving it. In the short time I have been there I have learned so much about photography I can't tell you how this blanket is being lifted from my eyes. Currently I am taking a B&W 4x5 view camera class that includes darkroom techniques, and a typical 101 class that requires 35mm slide film.

I am currently shooting a canon xt for digital and a 1n for film. The size and use of the 1n has really spoiled me! Using a full frame view finder is heaven when you have been shooting a crop camera for awhile too. What a nice camera!!! I currently have the Sigma 500dx flash, 50/1.8, 70-200/4L, and a Sigma 24-70/2.8. The 70-200/4L has spoiled me and I want to move to all L-glass. The Sigma seemed nice at first, and looks good at full frame even with slides blown up on a screen, but I'm finding that it just isn't sharp enough for my tastes especially at the extreems of the aperture. Don't get me wrong... that is one hell of a lens for $360, but not what I want for professional work.

Soooo... event/portrait photography being the priority, compatability with my 1n film camera and all-around shots for school being 2nd, concert photography being third, and general shooting being last on the list, here is what I'm thinking.

Canon 5d, Canon 24-70/2.8L, Canon 135/2L, Canon st-e2 flash controller, canon 580ex, canon 430 ex. I will keep the 70-200/4L, the xt for backup/travel and either keep the sigma 24-70 for a backup or more likely just sell it. This package of course is about a $6000 investment and it will be all I can afford for quite some time, so I would like opinions. I want this to be a rig that I can use as a pro for many years. Body will likely get replaced as new technology comes about, but I want to buy lenses now that will be with me forever. I also have a lowend ebay 3 studio strobe/softbox setup that I can use but that purchase was more to just familiarize myself with light placement and the general use of multile flash units... the canon flash system seems far better for event work.

The big killer on this, is I originally planned to keep the sigma and just pick up the 135/2L, but like I said... L-glass can spoil the hell out of you! I am also considering the 24-105/4L IS in leiu of the 135 and the 24-70 just to keep the price under control, but like I said, I want to be fully satisfied with these lenses. I often see the 135 compared to the orther comon portrait primes but never to the 24-105. I have seen the 24-105 compared to the 24-70, but it is hard for me to determine how big of a step up the 24-70 is. Keep in mind my working knowlege of quality glass is limited to the sigma and 70-200/4L that I currently own... none of these lenses are really compared to them for obvious reasons. IS is not a big deal for me, and I can continue to use my sigma for low-light concert work, but the bokeh that the 135 is capable of makes that my dream lens and I know I will eventually buy it anyways, so I'm thinking now is the time. I'm hoping a retailer may play ball with me a bit if I order all together.

Any and all comments welcome. I'm looking to order all of this stuff next week.

Matt

jdryan3 · April 24, 2007

First of all, congratulations on being bold enough to make the jump and pursue your passion. Way to go!

I can tell you I love my 5D and the primary lens I use on it is the 24-70. Very usable wide open and in low light. I have heard wondoerful things about the 135 but have not used it. I shoot my portraits either wide or with my 70-200 f/2.8. Sometimes the 100 f/2.

On the flash, you may want to wait another 4 weeks or so and get the 580 EX II. I understand it does have a PC connection which may come in handy later on if you use Pocket Wizards. However it will be more than the 580EX and you are getting the Canon remote which does have the full E-TTL capability.

Considering the kind of jack you're going to layout, you may also want to get the 50 f/1.8 for $70. Great little lens. Heck you may get them to throw it in for free!

mmmatt · April 24, 2007

jdryan3 wrote:

First of all, congratulations on being bold enough to make the jump and pursue your passion. Way to go!

I can tell you I love my 5D and the primary lens I use on it is the 24-70. Very usable wide open and in low light. I have heard wondoerful things about the 135 but have not used it. I shoot my portraits either wide or with my 70-200 f/2.8. Sometimes the 100 f/2.

On the flash, you may want to wait another 4 weeks or so and get the 580 EX II. I understand it does have a PC connection which may come in handy later on if you use Pocket Wizards. However it will be more than the 580EX and you are getting the Canon remote which does have the full E-TTL capability.

Considering the kind of jack you're going to layout, you may also want to get the 50 f/1.8 for $70. Great little lens. Heck you may get them to throw it in for free!

Thanks Dave. I do have the fantastic plastic already. Not a bad lens for sure. I think the exIIs are already available... or it seems that way as many sites no longer list the ex, but I could be wrong there. $100+ difference from what I can see and a little more durability and a pc connection doesn't seem like all that great an investment. I certainly understand the benefits of both, but I'm trying to stick with what I really need.
I meant to mention a question on that remote too... being infrared, is that even going to work if I have my flash units place behind me. How about if I want the main flash on my bracket and the secondary set up as a hairlight/effect/background illumination. I need to research that one more. The pocket wizzard is an fm remote if I remember correctly right? Any other solutions that provide ettl meetering and infrared assit from the on-camera remote? I currently have a low-end fm remote for my studio strobes, but it has no metering... I just use a flash meter and shoot manual with thoes which I don't particularly like and is less suited for anything other than posed shots without some skills I haven't yet mastered.

matt

andymillson · April 24, 2007

I have successfully tested the ST-E2 controlling aflash both behind me and on a bracket

I would definitely test the setup tho. The room I tested with the flash behind was not a large one, so results may vary depending upon distance etc

Andy

pathfinder · April 24, 2007

Matt,

Your choices seem excellent re: 5D, 24-105 vs 24-70 Ls, 580ex, ST-E2.

I prefer the 24-105F4 IS L as a general walk about lens, but for a wedding being shot indoors prefer the 24070 f2.8 L. Both are great lenses - one is faster and bigger, one is lighter and longer. You pay your money and take your choice.

Re: the ST-E2 IR controller. It is either loved or hated fromthe threads here on dgrin. I love mine. I never leave with my backpack without my ST-E2 within it. The ability to use ETTL and an off camra flash is just dynamite for me.

I have written about the ST-E2 in these links

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=57163&highlight=ST-e2

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=50293&highlight=ST-e2+Pathfinder

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=52598&highlight=ST-e2

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=49999&highlight=ST-E2+Christmas+candids

mmmatt · April 24, 2007

Wonderful!!!! Thanks for the replys. I will check out those threads about the st e2 (thanks for the linx, I should have searched myself before asking) and mull the lens thing over a bit more... I have read that the 24-105 is a much better walk-about lens because of the size, and that is a big reason I went with the 70-200 f4 instead of the 2.8 as that is more of a fun lens for me anyway. To be honest though, if I'm at a theme park or someplace where photography is not the main focus of my being there, I will probably just bring the xt and kit-glass for a lighter and less valuable package anyway. If I'm hiking in the mountains or another type of photo mission I will probably just eat my Wheaties.

As I said in my first post, priority is the wedding work and that seems to scream for the 24-70, but if the difference between the quality of that + the 135 vs the 24-105 is not a very big one, then I still may opt to save the dough and do it all with one lens which is also quite convienient. From a distance, I know 2 f stops will make a big difference in how well I can blur the backgrounds, which makes me really want that 135, but I have also seen quite a few sample photos with that lense where the DOF is so tight you get eyes in focus and a blurry nose/ears. That I don't typically like, so headshots I may have to stop down a bit anyway. But regardless of the f stop, it is my understanding that the design of the aperture and the inherent simplicity of a prime are what makes that lens really special.

See how my brain works? Sheesh!!

Matt

pathfinder · April 24, 2007

The 135f2 L is a jewel of a lens. Some may find it a little long for headshots. The 85mm primes were always favored for head and shoulders portraits with 35mm film I think. 85f1.8is cheaper than the 135 L also.

The 24-70f2.8 is a great lens and a standard for wedding shooters, and for shooting indoors the larger aperrture is easly worth the weight.

The 24-105 will not replace the 135f2 either. The 135 f2 L has the best bokeh to be found anywhere. I will not part with mine.

But when I go walk about, the 24-105 IS L is what is on my 5D.

So many choices, so litle time:D

jdryan3 · April 24, 2007

pathfinder wrote:

So many choices, so litle time:D

So little money... :cry

Shima · April 24, 2007

jdryan3 wrote:

So little money... :cry

Oh the things I could do if I had no bills...

mmmatt · April 24, 2007

Hey Shima... I like your signature. Kinda funny you need to buy your glass before your trip to Japan! I thought that was WHY people went to Japan!

Anyways, Pathfinder that is great info on the st-e2. That sounds like the ticket for me. Never occured to me I could use it just for the IR focus. That would be sweet in and of itself. I think I will plan on that for sure.

I was going to ask this but I figured I could test it myself. How far back would I need to be to really utilize that 135 as a portrait lens? Is it going to be too long for a church setting? So I set the 70-200 @ 135 and put it on the 1n... not unreasonable me thinks for 2-ups. The speed would certainly be sweet for shots during the service. Pathfinder, "When you say too long for headshots" are you refering to the DOF issue I was refering to, or something else? Don't some people do portraits with even much longer lenses when they have the space? I know the 80-100 range is most typical for studio settings but I always thought that was just for the subject to camera distance issues.

Matt

pathfinder · April 24, 2007

The 135 is just a little longer than the 85-105s that were the preferred lengths for head and shoulders shots with full frame 35mm cameras. The 85f1.8 is about 1/2 the price of the 135f2 L - lighter, cheaper, very sharp, but a llittle less reach. Might be easier to use indoors in a church setting.
The 135 will compress the depth of the image just a little more than the shorter lenses like the 85mm- but lots of folks use a 135 without misgivings -

If you find you like the results you get at 135mm, the 135f2 L will work great, I love mine and 'gus raves about his. The 135 L is razor sharp with a great bokeh.

If you shoot at f2, the depth of field with be very shallow and you will get only one eye in sharp focus some times unless you are very attentive. Longer lenses will have shallower DOF wide open when shot at short distances.

There is no right answer here, just which you prefer. You may find you want both the 85 and the 135.

If I had to chose, not sure what I would do myself.

mmmatt · April 24, 2007

pathfinder wrote:

The 135 is just a little longer than the 85-105s that were the preferred lengths for head and shoulders shots with full frame 35mm cameras. The 85f1.8 is about 1/2 the price of the 135f2 L - lighter, cheaper, very sharp, but a llittle less reach. Might be easier to use indoors in a church setting.
The 135 will compress the depth of the image just a little more than the shorter lenses like the 85mm- but lots of folks use a 135 without misgivings -

If you find you like the results you get at 135mm, the 135f2 L will work great, I love mine and 'gus raves about his. The 135 L is razor sharp with a great bokeh.

If you shoot at f2, the depth of field with be very shallow and you will get only one eye in sharp focus some times unless you are very attentive. Longer lenses will have shallower DOF wide open when shot at short distances.

There is no right answer here, just which you prefer. You may find you want both the 85 and the 135.

If I had to chose, not sure what I would do myself.

yeah... I already find I want both, and about 10 other canon lenses as well!!!! I guess I never really considered the 85 because I'm so hot and bothered over that 135... That lense and what my intent is with it was one of the deceiding factors in going with a full frame sensor. It (the 85) really would probably do about everything I need and maybe do it better in some instances.... Just incase it isn't obvious, I will now be going back and fourth about this for the rest of the week! Step back and stop up with the ability to shoot tight from the back of the church, or shoot at slightly more comfortable distances & shoot full length formals and then crop for the in-service shots... hmmm.

I'm going to research the 24-105 vs 24-70 comparison a little more too... I was thinking there was a pretty drastic difference in the quality of thoes two lenses, but it sounds like they both have pretty good support around here.

Thanks again for all the good input.

Matt

pathfinder · April 25, 2007

The 24-70 vs the 24-105 in image quality and resolving power I really don't see much difference. I have images from either lens that are razor sharp.

I think there more barrel distortion at 24mm with the 24-105 than the 24-70.

It really comes down to how often you plan to shoot at f2.8, and how much the weight diffeence means to you.

mmmatt · April 25, 2007

pathfinder wrote:

The 24-70 vs the 24-105 in image quality and resolving power I really don't see much difference. I have images from either lens that are razor sharp.

I think there more barrel distortion at 24mm with the 24-105 than the 24-70.

It really comes down to how often you plan to shoot at f2.8, and how much the weight diffeence means to you.

OK... that helps. I will look later today at a few other features of each lens also. Weight difference is least important to me. If I sell the sigma I won't have macro capability so I need to look at minimum focusing distance and things like that too. If I get the 24-105, then I will almost have to keep the sigma for the speed. I like shooting a zoom lens at concerts instead of messing with primes in a shoulder to shoulder crowd of beer swilling dancin' fools, and I'm an avid concert recordist so it is really dual purpose when I am shooting at a concert.

I like the speed for the obvious low-light advantages, but another stop can make a big difference in how the ambient light is balanced with flash too (I think there was something about that in one of the st-e2 threads you pointed me to), and of course the dof/bokeh issues as well. Maximum f-stop is another consideration though... I like to do some timed exposure stuff when I'm shooting landscapes or stills and not being able to stop down on a bright day is a disadvantage on some lenses. Having similar filter sizes across the board is pretty nice when buying filters... I might also just pick now and take a bit of a hit in resale if they don't suit my needs a couple months down the road.

I'm in the process of moving, and have been hoping to set up a little portrait studio in the basement of the new place. I visited today to get the key and drop a few things off. While there I went to the basement again and it would be tough to use that 135 down there for any portrait work, so the 85/1.8, as much as I hate to admidt it, may be more practical for me.

Hardest thing is just the thought of dropping this much ching and still not ending up with that 135... Oh well, I should be able to get over that if that is how it falls.

Thanks again

Just for fun, here is a shot with the sigma from a concert a few weeks ago... it really isn't bad for concert shots intended for the web untill you start croping, but I'm sure the L-glass would be far superior. (xt @ iso1600, sigma 24-70 @70mm, 1/60 (shutter priority), f/3.2 RAW > ps cs2 > jpg w/ noisefixer)

Matt

LiquidAir · April 25, 2007

I love my 24-105 for walk around, travel, and landscape. However, in low light situations it usually stays in the bag or at home. Is f/4 fast enough for wedding work? It all comes down to how you light. For much of my low light work I tend to mix flash and ambient which demands a fast aperture. However, if you are making good use of both flashes, f/4 will serve you just fine.

For formal portriats I use primes. The majority of mine are shot with the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8. When I have time to set up the shot I prefer the softer bokeh and better DoF control of a prime to a zoom.

The 135/2 is a great lens. At events the most common shot I get with it is head and shoulders candids. I like the focal length when the overall scene is very cluttered because I can pick out faces and beautifully blur the background. For shooting weddings it will really shine in larger spaces.

As for lens choices, take a look at the Tamron 28-75/2.8. I haven't tried it, but all reviews of it I have seen have been quite good and if I were to get a f/2.8 zoom that is the first place I would look. The Tammy, the 50/1.8, 80/1.8 and 135/2 would make likely make a very nice low light kit on the 5D for a reasonable price.

mmmatt · April 25, 2007

LiquidAir wrote:

I love my 24-105 for walk around, travel, and landscape. However, in low light situations it usually stays in the bag or at home. Is f/4 fast enough for wedding work? It all comes down to how you light. For much of my low light work I tend to mix flash and ambient which demands a fast aperture. However, if you are making good use of both flashes, f/4 will serve you just fine.

For formal portriats I use primes. The majority of mine are shot with the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8. When I have time to set up the shot I prefer the softer bokeh and better DoF control of a prime to a zoom.

The 135/2 is a great lens. At events the most common shot I get with it is head and shoulders candids. I like the focal length when the overall scene is very cluttered because I can pick out faces and beautifully blur the background. For shooting weddings it will really shine in larger spaces.

As for lens choices, take a look at the Tamron 28-75/2.8. I haven't tried it, but all reviews of it I have seen have been quite good and if I were to get a f/2.8 zoom that is the first place I would look. The Tammy, the 50/1.8, 80/1.8 and 135/2 would make likely make a very nice low light kit on the 5D for a reasonable price.

Thanks for the advice. I guess I forsee the 24-70/105 being the lens I'm shooting 90% of the time (it is now). So this is the 1 lens I don't want to compromise on. I'm affraid that the tammy would be a compromise like the sigma is but I will research that. If I can get top knotch performance from a zoom, I want to use it just for the ease of being able to fill my frame and compose my shot without being a distraction "zooming with my feet". For formals not so big a deal, but time is always a factor there, and switching lenses around takes time. Maybe I don't buy the prime right away and just see how the zoom works for me. I have the 70-200 f4L so I have the focal range covered and to my developing eye, that is a sharp lens... Maybe use that for the close up portraits and see what length I'm shooting before making the decesion on the portrait prime. I really want to get the camera, flash system, and the zoom ordered Monday and picking the zoom is already a hard one. At this point I'm leaning toward the 24-70 and that will allow me to dump the sigma and then I can try to figure out what I want for a prime. It will probably make sense to see what I can get set up in my new basement before I deceide because that will hopefully start getting use right away as I start trying to build my portfolio.

Matt

mmmatt · April 28, 2007

Well,
I made the decesion to go with the 24-70 f/2.8L, the 135 f/2L, the st-e2 and a pair of 580ex's instead of one 580 and one 430. Ended up being a tough call on the zoom because I found a great deal on the 5d/24-105 f/4L IS kit... I really want the speed though and I want to sell the sigma. I guess that is what made the difference for me. But the deal on the 5d Kit is still taunting me. Even if I only got $950 for the lens I would still be getting a great deal on the camera. Anybody looking for a 24-105 f/4L IS?
I haven't ordered the camera yet because I am still looking for the right deal. Same with the 135 f/2. I found a great price on that lens but the vendor doesn't have it in stock (funny how that works!), so I will keep looking there. Everything else is on it's way though.

Matt

Gettin Ready to dump some dough

Comments