Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 27 Jun 2012 (Wednesday) 13:53
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

HELP! Evaluate my Lens selection

 
samuelpark0125
Mostly Lurking
10 posts
Joined Jun 2012
     
Jun 27, 2012 13:53 |  #1

For T3i these are the ones I currently owned
1. 18-55mm (came with the camera)
2. 100mm Macro ((Got it for free)
3. 17-55mm

These are the ones that I intend to buy
1. Sigma 30 mm
2.70-300mm

I like to take portrait photos both indoor and outdoor. I especially want to have a portrait lens that will serve well in low light condition. In addition to that I am going on a vacation in a month which I do expect to take lots of landscape photos as well.

Addition to a general evaluation and suggestion, do I need a UWA?


T3i I 18-55 I 17-55 I 100

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
skycolt
Senior Member
410 posts
Joined Apr 2012
     
Jun 27, 2012 14:05 |  #2

30mm 1.4 is a good choice. I tried 50mm on crop body, it's good for head-shoulder but too long for group of people indoor. Outdoor should be fine. Maybe you also want to try 85mm 1.8, 128 equivalence on crop. I used to use 60mm macro on the crop to shoot people. That's also a lovely lens. For portrait get canon 10-22. I don't see why you need 70-300


1D IV | converted 1000D | ever changing lenses
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
samuelpark0125
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
10 posts
Joined Jun 2012
     
Jun 27, 2012 14:18 |  #3

skycolt wrote in post #14640178 (external link)
30mm 1.4 is a good choice. I tried 50mm on crop body, it's good for head-shoulder but too long for group of people indoor. Outdoor should be fine. Maybe you also want to try 85mm 1.8, 128 equivalence on crop. I used to use 60mm macro on the crop to shoot people. That's also a lovely lens. For portrait get canon 10-22. I don't see why you need 70-300

Thank you. Do you think I need a UWA if I need want to take decent landscape photo or should 17-55 just do a fine job? oh and someone gave me fisheye filter


T3i I 18-55 I 17-55 I 100

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Warlock
Senior Member
Avatar
505 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2011
Location: Stavanger, Norway
     
Jun 27, 2012 14:20 as a reply to  @ skycolt's post |  #4

The 30mm would be a good choice, i wouldnt use a 10-22 for portraits though, a UWA is seldom a good portrait lens, for groups and landscapes superb. A 50mm 1.8 is a good cheap option aswell, for use indoors and outdoors portrait. But the 17-55 should cover these things, so, maybe get a good blitz first.
430EX and nifty-fifty would be my advice, it would open doors for your 17-55 and you get to play with a decent prime.
Ps: There is no thing as a 15-55, its a 18-55 or a 15-85 ;-)a, and 100macro is a brilliant outdoors long Portrait lens


Canon 60D, Canon 1100D , 17-40 4L , 24mm 1.4L II,Zeiss Distagon T*2/35 ZE,50mm 1.2L, 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 IS L, 50mm 1.8II, 18-55 III, 430 exII,TT Retrospective 20, Lightroom 4.
Set a pen to a dream, and the colour drains from it.
R.H. Barlow and H.P. Lovecraft
"The Night Ocean"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
samuelpark0125
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
10 posts
Joined Jun 2012
     
Jun 27, 2012 14:22 |  #5

The Warlock wrote in post #14640225 (external link)
The 30mm would be a good choice, i wouldnt use a 10-22 for portraits though, a UWA is seldom a good portrait lens, for groups and landscapes superb. A 50mm 1.8 is a good cheap option aswell, for use indoors and outdoors portrait. But the 17-55 should cover these things, so, maybe get a good blitz first.
430EX and nifty-fifty would be my advice, it would open doors for your 17-55 and you get to play with a decent prime.
Ps: There is no thing as a 15-55, its a 18-55 or a 15-85 ;-)a

Thank you! In that case which UWA would you recommend me?


T3i I 18-55 I 17-55 I 100

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Warlock
Senior Member
Avatar
505 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2011
Location: Stavanger, Norway
     
Jun 27, 2012 14:34 as a reply to  @ samuelpark0125's post |  #6

The 10-22 is a brilliant UWA, i would recomend it as a UWA. I just wouldnt use it as a portait lens. The 30mm 1.4 would be a good lowlight no blitz option though, and the 50mm 1.8 and maybe the 28mm 1.8. But i would consider a blitz aswell. The 17-55 is a fast lens with IS, you can use that indoors with confidence,especially with a blitz.


Canon 60D, Canon 1100D , 17-40 4L , 24mm 1.4L II,Zeiss Distagon T*2/35 ZE,50mm 1.2L, 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 IS L, 50mm 1.8II, 18-55 III, 430 exII,TT Retrospective 20, Lightroom 4.
Set a pen to a dream, and the colour drains from it.
R.H. Barlow and H.P. Lovecraft
"The Night Ocean"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kawi_200
Goldmember
1,409 posts
Likes: 26
Joined Jul 2011
Location: Everett, WA
     
Jun 27, 2012 14:34 |  #7

I cannot live without an UWA. Landscape is my main shooting and I use UWA almost everytime I go out shooting. I think everyone should have some form of wide angle at least once. Maybe it's not right for them, but you never know until you find out.


5D4 or 6D2..... Waiting to find out which I buy | 8-15L |24-70mm f/4L IS | 24L II | 40mm pancake | 100L IS | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mk2 | 400mm f/4 DO IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
skycolt
Senior Member
410 posts
Joined Apr 2012
     
Jun 27, 2012 14:35 |  #8

samuelpark0125 wrote in post #14640218 (external link)
Thank you. Do you think I need a UWA if I need want to take decent landscape photo or should 17-55 just do a fine job? oh and someone gave me fisheye filter

for me, 17mm or 18mm is not wide enough for landscape on a crop. But you can wait, try the current setup like Warlock said and see.


1D IV | converted 1000D | ever changing lenses
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
samuelpark0125
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
10 posts
Joined Jun 2012
     
Jun 27, 2012 14:42 |  #9

skycolt wrote in post #14640178 (external link)
30mm 1.4 is a good choice. I tried 50mm on crop body, it's good for head-shoulder but too long for group of people indoor. Outdoor should be fine. Maybe you also want to try 85mm 1.8, 128 equivalence on crop. I used to use 60mm macro on the crop to shoot people. That's also a lovely lens. For portrait get canon 10-22. I don't see why you need 70-300


Do you think it is much wiser choice for me to get 10-22 instead of 70-300 which I do not remember the reason why I wanted to get start from the beginning? Oh and btw I'm gonna go to see some extreme landscape including Grand Canyon. I hope 10-22 do good job for taking portrait behind the Canyon if I buy that


T3i I 18-55 I 17-55 I 100

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jakebluez
Member
46 posts
Joined May 2012
     
Jun 27, 2012 14:54 |  #10

The Warlock wrote in post #14640225 (external link)
A 50mm 1.8 is a good cheap option aswell

For portraits on a crop sensor, the 50/1.8 will give you great images. It's the equivalent of 80mm on crop sensor, which is a fantastic portrait FL for drawing a subject out of the background.

As for UWA, this is the real disadvantage of crop sensor. The 10-22 is a good option.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
skycolt
Senior Member
410 posts
Joined Apr 2012
     
Jun 27, 2012 15:01 |  #11

samuelpark0125 wrote in post #14640293 (external link)
Do you think it is much wiser choice for me to get 10-22 instead of 70-300 which I do not remember the reason why I wanted to get start from the beginning? Oh and btw I'm gonna go to see some extreme landscape including Grand Canyon. I hope 10-22 do good job for taking portrait behind the Canyon if I buy that

All based on purpose. I like birding so I am more to the long lenses. And I do think 10-22 is wiser based on your purpose. Plus Grand Canyon is such a good place to try UWA. How can you miss that?


1D IV | converted 1000D | ever changing lenses
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Jun 27, 2012 15:24 |  #12

samuelpark0125 wrote in post #14640124 (external link)
For T3i these are the ones I currently owned
1. 18-55mm (came with the camera)
2. 100mm Macro ((Got it for free)
3. 17-55mm

These are the ones that I intend to buy
1. Sigma 30 mm
2.70-300mm

I like to take portrait photos both indoor and outdoor. I especially want to have a portrait lens that will serve well in low light condition. In addition to that I am going on a vacation in a month which I do expect to take lots of landscape photos as well.

Well, none of your current lenses nor the ones you plan to buy are what would most commonly be called portrait or landscape lenses.

18-55... sell it. You won't get much, but the 17-55 is a much better lens.
100mm macro: Canon? USM or L/IS? Either one is an excellent macro lens.
17-55mm... great walk-around lens.

Sigma 30/1.4 is a nice, fast standard lens for low light. Just get it soon, in case you have to swap it a few times to get a "good copy". They seem to have focus calibration issues over at Sigma. Yes, it might be used for group portraits, full length (vertical) portraits of couples, for wider environmental portraits (a person in their surroundings, such as where they live or where they work or what they are doing). But get too close and you'll see all sorts of perspective distortions. Position the person too close to the edge of the image and they'll look oddly stretched, too... called anamorphic distortion. These are simply inherent characteristics of a lens this focal length. There's nothing that can be done about it.

Usually a short telephoto lens is used for portraiture, to give the most natural looking perspective. On your camera, that would be a 50mm to an 85mm lens. There are several good 50mm lenses. I am not a big fan of the 50/1.8... it's inexpensive & manages good images, but its focus is slow and erratic. I recommend the Canon 50/1.4, but be sure to get and use the lens hood with it. There are also a couple excellent 85mm you might want to consider: Canon 85/1.8 is fast focusing and a really nice lens. Sigma 85/1.4 is pricier, and it's a little slower focusing, but it has quite nice image qualities. If you go with the Sigma, be sure to order early and test it out, in case you need to swap due to focsuing issues.

Note: some people refer to the 50mm as an "indoor portrait" lens and the 85mm as an "outdoor portrait" lens. That's just referring to the fact that you need a bit more working space with the 85mm... it might be too long in tigher spaces indoors. On the other hand, with more working space you might get more candid shots, avoid disturbing or intruding upon your subject.

This isn't to say that you can't use other focal lengths... longer and wider... for portraits if you wish. In fact, a lot of fashion photography is delliberately done with a longer tele lens, for the subtle compression effect it gives. That would be a 100mm, 135mm, maybe even a 200mm lens on your camera. Various lenses, wider and longer can be fun to use for portraits... but there's a reason people gravitate to those short telephotos for the purpose. They give the most natural perspective and can nicely blur down distracting backgrounds.

Any of the mentioned "portrait" lenses can serve in low light. That's not really the most important reason to get a big aperture lens for portraits, though. In my opinion, the ability of a larger aperture to blur away ugly and distracting backrounds is more important. You do have to watch, though... too large an aperture, used too close, and depth of field or the area in sharp focus, can get too shallow and parts of a person's face might be blurred. You also might experiment with ISO 1600 and 3200 on your camera... that will handle a lot of low light situations pretty effectively.

Most often for scenics, people tend to think of wide and ultrawide lenses. Again, this isn't a hard and fast rule. Some folks choose to use standard and even tele lenses, too. The 17mm end of your 17-55 might be useful, it's moderately wide. But often you might find an even wider lens necessary, to capture the whole view in front of you.

I agree that the Canon 10-22 is an excellent choice (buy and use the lens hood for it, sold separately... but I recommend that for all lenses anyway). I also really like the Tokina 12-24/4 and that's what I ended up buying a few years ago instead. There are several other wide and ultrawide lenses, but personally I think these two are the best of the crop.

The 70-300mm isn't a bad choice, but you are probably going to find it most useful for sports, wildlife, and similar. There are a bunch of different 70-300s. On a longer lens like this, I highly recommend getting IS or Image Stabilization. That's not so important on shorter lenses that are pretty easily handheld, but can be quite helpful on longer teles.

I also suggest look for lenses with USM (or Sigma HSM) focusing drive. It's faster and more accurate. The Canon 70-200s... all four versions, are excellent lenses and all have USM, though only two models have IS. The least expensive lens is the EF-S 55-250, which has IS, but not USM. However, if you only see occasional need for a lens this long focal length, it might be adequate. Depends upon what you want to shoot.


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
samuelpark0125
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
10 posts
Joined Jun 2012
     
Jun 27, 2012 15:25 |  #13

skycolt wrote in post #14640369 (external link)
All based on purpose. I like birding so I am more to the long lenses. And I do think 10-22 is wiser based on your purpose. Plus Grand Canyon is such a good place to try UWA. How can you miss that?

haha well said~!bw!


T3i I 18-55 I 17-55 I 100

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RafaPolit
Goldmember
Avatar
1,668 posts
Joined Jun 2005
Location: Quito, Ecuador
     
Jun 27, 2012 16:06 |  #14

I agree on what's been said and discussed!

The 17-55 is a phenomenal lens and could be used moderately for portraits. A dedicated prime for that (50mm or 85mm) would be a nicer choice, but you need the 17-55 focal range. If you want to do landscaping, the 10-22 is really, IMHO, a fantastic choice!!! I bought mine precisely for a trip through Europe and found using it much more than anticipated, amounting to almost half the pictures I took.

For the long end, I would stay away from the 70-300 unless you are talking about the L version, which I have the feeling you aren't :) . If you want a longer telephoto (I know I do as I like doing faces and even with 85mm you need to be 'obvious' to the subject, while with longer FLs you can be more discreet) either the 55-250 or one of the 70-200 incarnations (whichever your budget allows).

Since I own and use some of the lenses you are describing, perhaps you would find it useful to go to my web page (on my sig) and check them out if it would be of any use (lens used for each picture is shown).

Best regards,
Rafa.
Edit: Oh, by the way... yes, no point in having both the 18-55 and the 17-55, sell the kit lens!


Rebel T2i | EF-S 17-55 IS | EF 70-200 f4L | EF-S 10-22 | 430EX II |
Picture Galleries at:
www.rafaelpolit.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kfreels
Goldmember
Avatar
4,297 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, IN
     
Jun 27, 2012 20:08 |  #15

Since you have the 17-55, sell the 18-55 and buy the nifty fifty. The focal length is already covered but having a fast 1.8 lens around can be useful on occasion. You can usually pick it up used or refurbished for about $100.
The 70-300 is nice but if your do a lot of portrait work, you may be better off with a 70-200 f2.8. This will give you more background blur than you can get with the 70-300. Both Canon and Sigma make a very nice one. The Canon mkII is awesome but expensive. The MkI is cheaper. The Sigma has about the optics of the Mk1 (maybe a bit better) with the OS and AF of the mkII (almost) and cost as much as the Mk1.
The Canon 10-22 is nice but for a few hundred less you can get the Sigma 10-20 which is also very nice. Here's the sample photo thread: https://photography-on-the.net …ead.php?t=14306​4&page=295
You can use the cash difference on some lighting and modifiers that will make a much greater difference in your portraits than the marginally better optics in the Canon glass.


I am serious....and don't call me Shirley.
Canon 7D and a bunch of other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,984 views & 0 likes for this thread
HELP! Evaluate my Lens selection
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is yeungr
1154 guests, 321 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.