Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 3, 2009, 2:29 PM   #41
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 54
Default

while were going back and forth... how is the lens linked below for covering events, studio work, portrait work? would you recommend something else better or??

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._f_2_8_IS.html

what im needing to find is the right balance for lenses that cover studio, portrait, events work, wedding, racing track stuff, sports, and street, night and some architecture really. It sounds like everything, lol.... but its what i need to cover with some good lens to go along with my future purchase of a Canon 50D or 7D.

My budget for lenses alone is about $2500.... Although hards gave me some really solid advice in this thread already.... any recommendations of combination of lens that you would get to cover all of that stuff?

Last edited by JayStar86; Oct 3, 2009 at 2:52 PM.
JayStar86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2009, 3:54 PM   #42
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

One lens will never cover everything if you want optimum results.

That Canon lens is outstanding from comments I've seen from Canon shooters and I'd probably consider starting out with it if I were a Canon shooter.

However, the Depth of Field may not be as shallow as desired for some photos (depending on how much you're filling the frame with your subject), or long enough for some photos (depending on subject type, how far away you are, etc.). For example, for "racing", you 'd better be standing on the edge of track itself (and be able to pan *very* fast) in order to get many keepers if you want good detail.

You won't find one lens that does everything well in all conditions.

For example, I've spent some time shooting race cars at a local track here using some pretty decent gear (for example, a Nikon D3) using a 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S lens, as well as a borrowed 70-200mm f/2.8. To get keepers using the shorter 24-70mm lens on a full frame sensor (and the 17-50mm f/2.8 would give you roughly the same results on an APS-C size sensor), I needed to stand on the edge of the track as race cars zoomed by. The closer you are to the cars, the faster you'll need to pan. That makes it really tough to get a decent percentage of keepers (even if you're using a camera with really good Autofocus). Your access will also play a role (i.e., where you are allowed to shoot from).

As a starter package, the 17-50mm f/2.8 may be a great bet. Then, use something like a Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 (or Canon or Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8, or even longer lens) when you're shooting from further away.

There is no perfect choice. One approach would be to stick with some of the inexpensive kit lenses to start out with. Then, as you gain experience with them, you'll have a better idea of where you may need to make improvements (allowing you to make more informed decisions on the best lenses to meet your needs, based on the conditions you're shooting in).

If you're determined to spend more money to begin with, Hards80 had some good advice in a previous post to this thread. You'll need a variety of lenses to have more versatility in more conditions:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hards80 View Post
for weddings, events, etc. the first lenses' that come to mind

24-70 2.8 (or 17-55 2.8, or a 3rd party 18-50 2.8 since you are using aps-c)
70-200 2.8 (or 70-200 4 IS, or a 3rd party 50-150 2.8 digi-only)

fast prime or 2, some good examples
28 1.8 (sigma 30 1.4 digi only)
50 1.4
85 1.8/100 f2

that kind of coverage would be a good start, your budget will determine which 1s you get.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2009, 8:39 PM   #43
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 54
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post
One lens will never cover everything if you want optimum results.

That Canon lens is outstanding from comments I've seen from Canon shooters and I'd probably consider starting out with it if I were a Canon shooter.

However, the Depth of Field may not be as shallow as desired for some photos (depending on how much you're filling the frame with your subject), or long enough for some photos (depending on subject type, how far away you are, etc.). For example, for "racing", you 'd better be standing on the edge of track itself (and be able to pan *very* fast) in order to get many keepers if you want good detail.

You won't find one lens that does everything well in all conditions.

For example, I've spent some time shooting race cars at a local track here using some pretty decent gear (for example, a Nikon D3) using a 24-70mm f/2.8 AF-S lens, as well as a borrowed 70-200mm f/2.8. To get keepers using the shorter 24-70mm lens on a full frame sensor (and the 17-50mm f/2.8 would give you roughly the same results on an APS-C size sensor), I needed to stand on the edge of the track as race cars zoomed by. The closer you are to the cars, the faster you'll need to pan. That makes it really tough to get a decent percentage of keepers (even if you're using a camera with really good Autofocus). Your access will also play a role (i.e., where you are allowed to shoot from).

As a starter package, the 17-50mm f/2.8 may be a great bet. Then, use some thing like a Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 (or Canon or Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8, or even longer lens) when you're shooting from further away.

There is no perfect choice. One approach would be to stick with some of the inexpensive kit lenses to start out with. Then, as you gain experience with them, you'll have a better idea of where you may need to make improvements (allowing you to make more informed decisions on the best lenses to meet your needs, based on the conditions you're shooting in).

If you're determined to spend more money to begin with, Hards80 had some good advice in a previous post to this thread. You'll need a variety of lenses to have more versatility in more conditions:

appreciate the response... im itching to just get out with all this gear and just go at it!

I shall think about your advice for sure!

Im starting to think Im gunna end up starting out with this lens(below) when i pick up my 50D or 7D as it seems like its a great all around lens for general use.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...S.html#reviews
JayStar86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2009, 5:21 PM   #44
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 54
Default

so after asking some real vague questions in this thread... sorry for that btw...

I have a specific question to ask now.

Which would in your opinion be the better route to take if you were given the options below... please bear with me, lol... some cost analysis type of comparison Ive done below! (prices and used stuff from BH PHOTO)

Option A)
Get the Canon 50D Body--------------------$1054
Get the Canon 17-55mm F2.8 IS Lens------$1060
Get the Canon 70-200mm F4 IS Lens-------$1235 = TOTAL $3349

Option B)
Get the Canon 50D Body---------------------$1054
Get the Canon 17-55mm F2.8 IS Lens-------$1060
Get the Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS Lens------$1949 = TOTAL $4063

Option C)
Get the Canon 7D Body ----------------------$2100
Get the Canon 17-55mm F2.8 IS Lens-------$1060 = TOTAL $3160

Option D)
Get the Canon 7D Body-------------------------$2100
Get the Canon 17-55mm F2.8 IS Lens USED--$899
Get the Canon 70-200mm F4 IS Lens USED---$989 = TOTAL $3988

Option E)
Get the Canon 50D Body USED ----------------$899
Get the Canon 17-55mm F2.8 IS Lens USED--$899
Get the Canon 70-200mm F4 IS Lens USED---$989 = TOTAL $2787
JayStar86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2009, 6:02 PM   #45
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

Option B sounds like the ideal kit for you.
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2009, 6:17 PM   #46
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 54
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hards80 View Post
Option B sounds like the ideal kit for you.
do you think the canon 70-200 F2.8 IS is that much better then the 70-200 F4 IS... well that much better enough to justify the extra cost?
JayStar86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2009, 6:57 PM   #47
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

depends on what you are shooting.

for sports and action. the 2.8 will allow faster shutter speeds to stop action in lower light conditions.

just for general shooting, is there a big image quality difference between the two, probably not.
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2009, 7:05 PM   #48
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 54
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hards80 View Post
depends on what you are shooting.

for sports and action. the 2.8 will allow faster shutter speeds to stop action in lower light conditions.

just for general shooting, is there a big image quality difference between the two, probably not.
sounds like the F4 is a better fit for me then... the amount of low light shooting for sports and action for me will probably be next to none... and I wouldn't mind having a lens that weighs less and the saving the $$$$.

I think the F4 combined with a good speedlight ought to do the trick good enough IMO even under low light conditions indoor and what not.
JayStar86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2009, 11:22 PM   #49
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 188
Default

If your going to spend that kind of Money you want a 7D. Its amazing. Since you need speed and accurate focus you can not go wrong. Its just out so we do not know what it will discount to but it will list for around $1700. Otherwise the T1i is really similar to the 50D. The 7D is also much better at low light situations. Here is a links from a reputable dealer, http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=CNEOS7D $1699. And also same price pre order from Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EOS-7D-B...4716944&sr=8-1

***** You also might want to consider some third party lenses. The Tamron 17-50 2.8 is $400 dollars and if you read its reviews in some respects is superior to the Canon.

Do note that their are sometimes issues of compatibility with third party production since Canon does not release their flash and lens protocols. Generally it is an issue if the Camera is newer then the lens. They usually can be sent in to be updated. If you buy from a reliable dealer you can always return it. I would use Amazon over buydig.

Note that prices will settle downward over a couple of months the 7D is white hot and just started to come into stores at the beginning of October. Also note like some others I would get the t1i over the 50D and put the money towards, Lenses, Flashes, tripods etc. Basically
T1i $700, The 50D is around $1030 and the 7D is around $1700.

Last edited by anthlover; Oct 4, 2009 at 11:41 PM.
anthlover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 5, 2009, 3:05 AM   #50
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 54
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthlover View Post
If your going to spend that kind of Money you want a 7D. Its amazing. Since you need speed and accurate focus you can not go wrong. Its just out so we do not know what it will discount to but it will list for around $1700. Otherwise the T1i is really similar to the 50D. The 7D is also much better at low light situations. Here is a links from a reputable dealer, http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=CNEOS7D $1699. And also same price pre order from Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EOS-7D-B...4716944&sr=8-1

***** You also might want to consider some third party lenses. The Tamron 17-50 2.8 is $400 dollars and if you read its reviews in some respects is superior to the Canon.

Do note that their are sometimes issues of compatibility with third party production since Canon does not release their flash and lens protocols. Generally it is an issue if the Camera is newer then the lens. They usually can be sent in to be updated. If you buy from a reliable dealer you can always return it. I would use Amazon over buydig.

Note that prices will settle downward over a couple of months the 7D is white hot and just started to come into stores at the beginning of October. Also note like some others I would get the t1i over the 50D and put the money towards, Lenses, Flashes, tripods etc. Basically
T1i $700, The 50D is around $1030 and the 7D is around $1700.

The t1i has been out of the question for quite some time now.... the body decision is between the 50D and 7D.

As for the Tamron 17-50... i will look into it... the price is attractive... but I want lens that will last a long time that are high quality... body's always get replaced over the years... but good lens can be kept and used for years so I dont mind spending the $$$ on them.

If there is one lens that i know im dead set on getting its the 17-55mm F2.8... my options for that lens is Canon, Tamron and Sigma and I guess Ill look into each some more. so thanks.

As for the body decision... Im starting to think since i can wait to buy it... I will wait ill perhaps prices drop a few hundred and then take the leap on one.... it really is quite the camera from what I have read and heard about it. The other thing that is attractive about is that when I got a full frame camera down the road in a few years... the 7D would be a great aps-c camera to have for "Faster" photography and as a backup/combination to the FF camera.

So yah.

The two things i have settled on most likely, lol, is the 7D Body and 17-50/55mm F2.8 Lens... I just dont know which one anymore after reading about the Sigma, Tamron and Canon.

Clearly the Canon is a far superior lens in terms of build quality, features and technology.... but its $600 MORE!!!!!

Last edited by JayStar86; Oct 5, 2009 at 3:31 AM.
JayStar86 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:51 PM.