Which set of lenses?

[tonytony]

The camera I will buy is a 20D, and I already own a 420EX.
The main type of photography will be Portraits, Fashion, Glamour, Candids, Lifestyle (for stock agencies but also commissioned work), both studio and outdoor. :cool:
I want to specialize but I am sometimes more generic and I end up taking picture of wildlife, lanscapes, food or sport as well. :) Please keep in mind that I am trying to enter in the pro market initially on a "free time" basis (I have a day job at the moment, but i am willing to quit when it will be possible on behalf of photography).

Initially I wanted also AlienBees studio lights but it seems out of budget at the moment. :evil: Do you think I can cope with a 420EX or would you get a 580EX as master unit? Anyway, please vote on one of the possible set of lenses in my budget or advice different solutions. ;)

Thanks in advance, :D
Tony

PS: I will shop online either at www.cameraworld.co.uk (http://www.cameraworld.co.uk) or www.warehousexpress.com (http://www.warehousexpress.com)

[LightRules]

You've got some good glass options listed. It looks like you've got a set budget judging by the lens options given. Based on the above, I'd opt for the Sigma 24-70 and either the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 or Canon 70-200 f4. I think the f2.8s are the way to go though, if possible. Best wishes to you.

[ssim]

I have not yet voted in your poll as I really don't see a total package that is going to let you doing everything including your generic topics as you put them.

I can speak to the 50 1.8 MKII and the 70-200 (albeit my version is the f2.8 and IS). I won't speak to the rest as I have not had personal experience with the. Both of these are good lenses. To be honest I hardly ever use my 50. I tend to use my Canon 24-70 f2.8 to cover that range. While you may read on here some differing of opinions on the 24-70 my version is very sharp and have no issues with it. The 70-200 is also very sharp to the point where some of the shots don't even require USM in post processing.

The wide range of your intended subject matter makes it very difficult to get only two lenses which would cover the entire range of these. I have a wide range of zoom lenses but as of late have been using more primes than the zooms.

The Sigma 80-400 will give you the reach on some wildlife but you might have to consider adding a teleconverter to get the real reach that is required for some wildlife. I'm not familiar with the sharpness of this lens though. I can vouch for the Canon 100-400 and it is very sharp and served me very well.

I watched a pro photographer do a whole dance class in their dance outfits. He shot just about every single person shot with the 70-200 (he had a large dance studio to work in). The group shots he used either the 24-70 or the 16-35 (both Canon).

I would suggest getting the either the 550 or 580EX flashes and use the 420 as a slave to them.

My two cents worth.

[wilflee]

Because you have a limited budget, have you considered simply using ordinary incandescent lights instead of studio strobes?

Granted, ordinary lights are hotter, but the cost is a small fraction of studio strobes. This should get you started with a fairly low budget.

In the film days, using tungsten lights meant we have to use tungsten film. But with modern DSLR and custom white balance, all you have to do is set custom WB and you can use pretty much any light source you want as long as the source covers a fairly broad range of the visible spectrum.

[gasrocks]

Yes, try other lighting if you can't swing good studio strobes. Flourescents are cooler but sometimes hard to get WB correctly. You want to have prof. results and the subject range is fairly narrow. Why rely on zooms? Some $ spent on good primes might get you further. 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 macro, 135/2L etc etc

[tonytony]

Hmmm... interesting... so would you go for the tungsten strobes or for the 580EX to achieve the best image quality?

Cheers,
Tony

[buze]

Sigma 18-50 f2.8 + 50mm f1.8 MARK II + 70-200mm f4 L USM

The 18-50 is cossiderably smaller than the 24-70, and I don't find it overlaps with the 50 Prime at all in practice..

[gasrocks]

If you are really trying to "break" into prof. area - don't do too much at once. Get some good lenses and shoot outdoors. Later, you can justify the money for good quality studio storbes (not the camera mount storbes!)

[SolPics]

I tested most of the lens mentioned above (other than the Sigma 80-400) before I purchased mine. The best on the list for sharpness and color IMO were the Cannon 50 1.4, and 70-200 4.0L.
You should also look at the Tamron 28-75.

[tonytony]

Thanks everybody for your contributes. Having a limited budget (around 3000 euro) I won't be able to get any "decent" studio lights. In a "professional" prospective, as gasrocks has stated, it is better to start with good equipment camera+lenses and then eventually add a piece a time once I can "justify" it. In the end for the moment, even my poor 420ex will do the trick if I need to shoot indoor.

Thanks again,
Tony

PS: I will post my final decision in a few days :-)

[tonytony]

Ok here is the list of equipment that I think I'm going to buy. I think I have procrastinated enough :)
If you think I am doing any "big mistake" please advice :-P

Canon EOS 20D
Canon EF 50mm f1.4 USM + hood
Canon EF 85mm f1.8 USM + hood
Canon EF 70-200mm f4 L USM + hood
2 X Sandisk 1GB ULTRA II CF
2 Hahnel BP-511 + DCM-511 charger

Bloody expensive, but pretty nice looking! :D
As previously said, I already own a 420EX and a nice tripod Slik 300X.
I'd like to have the battery/vertical grip, as I shoot lots of portraits, but I think it is something that I can buy later (not so necessary). It costs around £150, which means that if I get it than I have to leave in the shop either the 50mm or the 85mm and I don't think it is worth. I know that there have been also big issues regarding the grip being faulty. :rolleyes: How really useful is a grip?

Cheers,
Tony

[tim]

What you've said you'll be specialising in is a huge range of photography. Seems people are listed a lot on there, so my recommendations will be for that, glamour, fashion, and portraits. I've thrown in a few random thoughts too.

* Buy fewer, high quality lenses, not lots of cheaper ones.
* Forget the 50mm F1.8, it's cheap and crappy, not professional level. Same with the kit lens.
* Most people need a standard range zoom, Canon 24-70 or Tamron 28-75 are my picks.
* The 100mm F2.8 macro is a great lens, incredibly sharp, great for portraits and also for food, which you also list.
* 50mm F1.4 is a good lens, but I can't see a use for it for what you've listed.
* What do you need a long zoom for?
* A single 420EX is not enough, but will get you started. Save up for the alien bees, at least one light plus a reflector, preferably 3 lights and some light modifiers. You'll need a studio to put them in. Forget tungsten or fluroscent lighting if you want to be a pro, but if you can get them cheap you can learn with constant tungsten lighting.
* Any plan to become a professional photographer should include training of some sort, and a timeframe measured in years, IMHO.
* If you're just buying your first SLR you'll need six months to a year or so to get used to it, depth of field, lighting, posing, etc. I'm not kidding or exaggerating. If you're experienced with SLRs then not so much.
* Buy books, lots of books, and read them. lightingmagic has some good ones, or look at lists on here.

Hope that helps :)

[Andy_T]

Only problem I see is that you don't have a 'normal' lens and that you are lacking in the wide angle department (which might not be dramatic for your purposes).

In addition to looking at the Tamron 28-75/2.8 or Sigma 24-70/2.8 I'd suggest to also think about getting the kit lens. The more expensive but also much better Sigma 18-50/2.8 might fill the wide angle gap and work nicely as normal lens.

Though they are both great lenses, I personally don't see the immediate need to get both the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 as starter lenses. I'd consider putting the price of the 85/1.8 towards getting the f/2.8 (non-IS) version of the 70-200 instead of the f/4.0 version. This will also be very usable for portraits (ok, so is the f/4.0, but the 2.8 will give you more flexibility).
You can always get the 85/1.8 later if you feel the need for it.

Best regards,
Andy

[wilflee]

Hmmm... interesting... so would you go for the tungsten strobes or for the 580EX to achieve the best image quality?

Cheers,
Tony
I've never heard of tungsten strobes before.

For better lighting, you should use off camera light source. The cost of a single 580EX + sync cord will buy you many many many 100W light bulbs and home made soft light panels.

If your budget is really limited, 4 or 5 100W light bulbs behind translucent fabric panels will get you better lighting than a single 580EX. Granted, 580EX is a lot easier to use with E-TTL and so on. But you can't match the effects of multiple lights agains 1 light source.