3 lenses recommended by a photo seminar guy

[Longwatcher]

Last night I attended a digital workflow seminar in Richmond. Most photographers I have seen in one place in many many years.

Some usefull stuff, a lot of sales pitches (a couple of which I was actually deliberatly hoping to see there), but what I thought was kind of amusing was his recommendations for the only three lenses you really need for portrait and wedding photography.

Now most long time fans of this site can probably guess which ones they are

His first choice was 70-200/2.8L IS (yes that's right he recommended the IS version) and then joked about the price. Did not say why the IS version though.

His second was the 24-70/2.8L and his third was 16-35/2.8L

Not so amazingly those would be my choice also, except I happen to like my 28-70 better then the 24-70. Although If I had to get a new one, I would go for the 24-70.

And again as everyone on this site already knows, Canon better choice then Nikon.
He chose Canon because "they have 75% of the worldwide Digital SLR market at this time, which leaves 25% for everyone else, inlcuding the next 4 competitors". He figures that Canon has more research dollars to spend then anyone else in DSLR market.

Seeing the sales pitches helped me make up my mind on a few things and made me wish I had seen one of them "iview" about a year ago - too late for me though. Good demo of Capture one.

I am also picking up the Monaco color calibration system as it looked like it would work better for me then the spider system. This being one of the ones I hoped to see demo'd.

Lastly one of the more amusing things to me was, ever photographer I talked to (other then the presenter) lived down in Hampton Roads area (about 90 minutes from Richmond) and I did not meet a single one from the Richmond area. So why do they keep holding workshops and seminars in Richmond? Everyone in SE VA would like to know (we have more poeple down our way as well).

Just felt like sharing,

[COKE CAN]

....

Wish I would have known. I'm only a beginner, though. I live in York Co.

So, hello neighbor. :lol:

[dharris]

I think he recommended the 70-200 F/2.8L IS USM version due to the versatility of use.

Not only is the lens superb on a pod, it can also be hand-held for weddings

and other non pod situations and yield awesome results.

Thanks for sharing.

[condyk]

The 70-200 F2.8 IS is great for weddings.

It certainly makes a great club when the drunk relatives start a fight!!

[Incomplete Pete]

Interesting, pretty much the setup I'm looking to complete. Although I don't see the point in spending double the ammount on the 16-35 f2.8 when the 17-40mm f4 is pretty much just as good, also much more sturdy!

[Jon Arno]

I'm located in the West End of Richmond, was this a invitational seminar? I wish I could have gone.

[tim]

Those seem like good recommendations to me. I have the Tamron instead of the middle range lens, which works well, and i'm holding off on the wide lens for now. I would (have) also added a good low light lens, like the 50mm F1.4.

[Tom W]

In Canon's "Lens Works III" book, the 16-35, 24-70, and 70-200 are looked as as a 3-lens set of sorts. I would have thought that a 12-24 (if Canon had one) would make a better accompaniment to the second two lenses, myself. On full-frame, 24 is pretty doggone wide.

Also, the 17-40 and 70-200 are considered a lightweight pair in the same book. All 5 lenses are known to be very good.

[raylks]

In Hong Kong, we call the combination of the three lenses recommended called "3 treasures of red strips" which represents a whole coverage from 16mm to 200mm with excellent image quality. I personally do not own any of them but I choose for a cheaper alternatives which I call as three "little red strips", 17-40mm, 28-70mm and 70-200mm f4/L.

The recommended lenses are great and I think they are the lenses most used by the photographers.

[Tom W]

"3 treasures of red stripes"

I like that. :)

I think that this is a very versatile setup on both full-frame and cropped (1.3 and 1.6) cameras. On the 1.3X, it certainly is, though the 16-35 is the least-used of the three for me. When I want wide, I tend to reach for the fisheye. :)

The setup you have is also very good - you have f/2.8 where it is most useful, in the middle.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I've "almost" got that set of three treasures.. well 2.5 I guess,..

I am happy with only f/4 on the wide end so the 17-40mm does the job for me.

Still the f/2.8 triple threat is certainly the dream team of zoom lenses.

[Tom W]

Truth be known (well, my opinion anyway), f/4 at the widest end is just fine. I don't think I've shot wide with anything bigger than f/5.6 in quite a while. F/8 to f/11 is the rule for ultrawide, at least for what I shoot.

And, 24 mm is a good wide end on your 1D Mk II anyway - I rarely switch to anything wider unless I'm going fisheye.

[MarkH]

If the answer is these Canon zoom lenses:
16-35 f2.8L
24-70 f2.8L
70-200 f2.8L IS

Then is the question: What are the only Canon zoom lenses available that are both f2.8 and weather sealed?

Of course some of us don't use the wide angle as much and don't necessarily need f2.8 when we do, the 17-40 f4L is also weather sealed.

Naturally those that have a 1 series body would prefer the magic 3 lenses both for their ability to allow the high-precision focus mode of the centre sensor (which requires a lens with f2.8 or faster) and also for the weather sealing. Of course the fact that these lenses are sharp doesn't hurt, but there are other sharp lenses available (like the 70-200 f4L). But of course the 70-200 f4L is not weather sealed and you can't take advantage of the high-precision focusing mode when using it.

[SkipD]

Something y'all might be interested in... I got the set of three monster lenses and then went on a search for a bag to tote them all in. I contacted Lowepro, and they said that the Stealth 650 was designed for exactly that group of lenses with a big body (1DS, 20D with grip, etc.) attached to one. It is absolutely the perfect shoulder bag to haul the combination in - with the hoods attached (reversed on the 70-200 and ready-to-work on the other two). I just need to do a little more exercise so I can carry it comfortably longer that two hours, because you really know you have some glass hung on your shoulder.

[randyk]

Can't argue with the choices from a quality stanpoint but I find the size of the Canon 2.8 mid zooms to be too large. I am willing to put up with a large lens on the long range since this is more speciality shooting but the wider angles are used more frequently in on the go or hiking situations. I prefer a wide zoom and fast mid prime.

[Longwatcher]

First answering the questions of how did I get to go to this seminar,
On a monthly basis I search on the internet for photography workshops heading to Virginia. (75% or more are in DC area, unfortunately) and I came across this one and asked for a ticket and they gave me one. Selkonic/Monaco actually technically provided it. Good for them as I ended up buying their product.

Second, The presenter preferred the f2.8 for more accurate white balance and faster, more accurate focus.