ANOTHER BODY OR NEW GLASS?

[Steve Parr]

I've been considering what my next purchase should be, and would like to get some opinions.

I'm shooting bands in clubs. I've already got the two primary lenses for that; the 50mm f/1.8, and 85mm f/1.8.

Would it make more sense to get the 70-200mm f/4L, which will see very limited use inside of dark, stage-lit clubs (but would be a hoot otherwise), or a second body? I've got the 300D now, and would have no problem getting another. I figure, with a second body, there would be no lens changes involved when I'm shooting bands.

Whaddya' think?

Steve

[pcasciola]

I'm not sure I've ever seen someone with an 85mm on a primary body and a 50mm on a 2nd body. Typically it's a longish prime on one, and a shorter zoom on the other. I doubt you'll be flipping between the 50 and 85 enough to justify 2 bodies. I'd save up and get the 70-200/2.8L IS. The IS will help a lot for the type of indoor shooting you are looking to do.

[Steve Parr]

I'm not sure I've ever seen someone with an 85mm on a primary body and a 50mm on a 2nd body. Typically it's a longish prime on one, and a shorter zoom on the other. I doubt you'll be flipping between the 50 and 85 enough to justify 2 bodies. I'd save up and get the 70-200/2.8L IS. The IS will help a lot for the type of indoor shooting you are looking to do.

What's the street price of one of those?

Steve

[pcasciola]

What's the street price of one of those?

SteveIt's way up there, like $1700. You can get the non-IS for around $1000, or the Sigma f/2.8 for around $650-700, which most people say is at least as good as Canon's f/4L with the bonus of having the extra stop for not much more money.

Have you considered the Tamron 28-75mm Xr Di? It's only about $325 and would probably do pretty well for you.

[Steve Parr]

It's way up there, like $1700. You can get the non-IS for around $1000, or the Sigma f/2.8 for around $650-700, which most people say is at least as good as Canon's f/4L with the bonus of having the extra stop for not much more money.

Have you considered the Tamron 28-75mm Xr Di? It's only about $325 and would probably do pretty well for you.

Haven't looked at the Tamron yet, although the Sigma looks pretty good...

Steve

[Merle]

Steve,

If you are shooting available light, to get the lighting effects and colors used on bands you will probably want to keep your fast lenses. I am a wedding photographer of 32years and I would not want to go into a shoot with only one camera body. One of the lenses I use a lot is the Tamron di 28-75 f2.8. But in some lghting situations the 2.8 would not work, example a candle light wedding using hand held. ;) :) :D

Good Shooting To Ya !!
Merle

[Thomas]

Have you considered the 24-70/2.8 ? If you can get within 4 meters to the band (I assume you do, while using you current lenses) then this one will give you what you need. I also use the 70-200/2.8 IS, but I need to be positioned further away or I can get the head shots only. The quality of the pictures is great. The 70-200/4 will be too slow.

Regards,

Thomas

[tim]

The Tamron 28-75 and Canon 24-70 are meant to be similar in image quality, but the Tamron's a lot cheaper. I have the Tamron and it's a great lens :)

[RockSlut]

I've been using my Tamron for live bands, and I'm loving it. It's much cheaper than a new body too!

[poke]

I've been using the 70-200mm f2.8L IS with available light to shoot concerts. Until I upgraded to the 20D, even having the 2.8 with IS wasn't enough. Now that I can shoot at 1600 and even 3200 ISO (sometimes) it is perfect.

[pcasciola]

Go with a second body, even if it's a used one. If you're getting by with the lenses you have now, you WON'T get by if your body conks out and requires a monthlong trip to Canon.Good point, Bloo. I hadn't even considered the backup aspect of a 2nd body. I was thinking of it more from a switching lens perspective. Now I gotta get me a 2nd body too. :D