Lens decisions

[vcutag]

Or, how you can help me spend my money, that seems to be the pastime around here. :)

I'm selling off my current lenses (save for the 50 f1.8), my iPod (anyone interested in a 20 gb 3rd gen iPod, PM me, it's for a good, camera related cause) and some other stuff to combine with a tuition refund and tax refund to enable me to afford a new lens set-up.

I'm working at the Virginia General Assembly, so I need a good, low-light telephoto zoom lens. I'm looking very hard at trying to find a used 70-200 f2.8 L, I've heard nothing but good things, and I like what I've seen of my coworker's.

For wide-angle and everyday use, I'm looking at the Tamron AF 28-75 f2.8. I have the "thrifty Fifty" for really low-light work, and the combination of those two above is going to be stretching it.

Any thoughts/suggestions?

[Leon van Batenburg]

Take a look at the EF 24-70/2.8 L. Very nice lens, fast AF, close focusdistance etc. for medium tele-work the 70-200 will do fine, though a bit heavy. For really low light work I use a combination of 35/1.4 and 135/2.0. Personally, I would never concider the 50/1.0, but the 85/1.2 would definitly be on my list.

[pcasciola]

I'm really happy with the Tamron 28-75mm Xr Di. The 24-70L is a really good lens too, but I'm guessing you are not ready to plunk down $1200 for one. I prefer the Tamron because it's much smaller and lighter, although it is definitely not as well built as the Canon and auto focus is slightly slower. Optically they are very close. I'm really happy with mine, but the first thing you should do is verify that you got a good copy (80% chance). Test it wide open at f/2.8 it should be nearly as sharp as it is at f/4. Search these boards for examples of what a bad copy looks like wide open.

Here's an example of bad and good copies of the Tamron:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=51644

[mikesd]

The Tamron along with the 70-200 f/2.8L will be a very nice lens combination. I also have the Tamron and give it a thumbs up.

[vcutag]

I'm really happy with the Tamron 28-75mm Xr Di. The 24-70L is a really good lens too, but I'm guessing you are not ready to plunk down $1200 for one. I prefer the Tamron because it's much smaller and lighter, although it is definitely not as well built as the Canon and auto focus is slightly slower. Optically they are very close. I'm really happy with mine, but the first thing you should do is verify that you got a good copy (80% chance). Test it wide open at f/2.8 it should be nearly as sharp as it is at f/4. Search these boards for examples of what a bad copy looks like wide open.

Here's an example of bad and good copies of the Tamron:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=51644

Yeah, my upper limit for the two lenses and a Sigma 500 flash is $1500, so I'm pushing it a bit as it is. Have to live on ramen noodles for a couple of weeks, but I'm willing to suffer for my art. :) Given what I'm currently using, I can live with it not being L glass.

Thanks for posting the link. I'll probably be ordering from B&H, as Richmond Camera doesn't carry any of this stuff, and Penn Camera up in DC would have to order it as well, doubtless with more markup. Hopefully B&H will accept it if it's blurry like the first guy's in that thread.

[tpinchback]

Same seutp I currently have, works great for what I need it for (basketball, track, swimming). Just add a flash and you will have a great collection.

[Andy_T]

Another vote for the Tamron 28-75/2.8.

If you really want wide angle at a budget, check eBay for the 18-55 kit lens. If you get a good one, it's fairly decent at f/5.6.

Best regards,
Andy

[vcutag]

Just wanted to say that I shot today's photos in that chamber with the 70-200 f2.8 L, and I'm sold. It was like night and day, the difference was stunning.

Now, I just need to find a pawn shop that takes appendages.