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 26 Jun 2018 (Tuesday) 11:34
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

New guy lens help

 
Bardi
Member
Avatar
101 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 62
Joined May 2018
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
     
Jun 26, 2018 11:34 |  #1

Hello all,
I'm sure you are all over the "What lens should I get?" question, but if you'll indulge me for a moment, I'd appreciate it.

I am on the newer side of photography, Canon owner for about a year and a half, and have only been 'serious' for about 6 months or so.

I have 2 crop bodies, a Rebel 2Ti and a 40D. So far my lens corral consists of 18-55 kit, 50mm 1.8, 28-135mm USM, 75-300mm 3.5-5.6.

I would like to step up to a fast lens. Currently I don't have a specific style, I enjoy street photography, some cityscape stuff, some people/candid, some low light areas, and I shoot my sister's running team races.

I have a friend who has a 24-70L 2.8 and a 70-200L 2.8 IS that are for sale. I know I don't NEED a new lens, but I have the opportunity to upgrade with glass that I personally know and I don't know how long that will be around.

Any input on a direction? Am I just falling into the GAS trap? I love the ability of the 50 at 1.8 in low light and my other lenses can't hang in that respect.

Thanks in advance for any input.


Gear List
Critique welcome. Editing ok. Thanks for looking

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
yellowt2
Senior Member
259 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jun 26, 2018 12:04 |  #2

If you're looking for a f/2.8 zoom I would go for the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 instead; that was my main lens back when I was a Canon crop DSLR shooter.

But...
Focal length is kind of a personal thing; I find 24-70mm zooms very awkward on crop sensors, I much prefer the 17-55mm range. Other people don't use wide angle very often, and like the extra reach at the long end.
With your 18-55, which end do you end up using most often? Would you miss the 18-24mm range if it wasn't there? How good a friend is this person? Could you maybe borrow the lenses for a week to try them out?

Another thought would be to get more primes. Your 50 f/1.8 is still over a stop faster than those f/2.8 zooms. I really like the 35mm f/2 IS (if you think your 50mm f/1.8 is good in low light, try a fast prime with image stabilization!), and the 85mm f/1.8 is a good lens at a good price also.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bardi
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
101 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 62
Joined May 2018
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
     
Jun 26, 2018 12:14 as a reply to  @ yellowt2's post |  #3

I never really use the 18-55 anymore, so I can't say I would miss it at all. I have borrowed both lenses, and loved both. The 24-70 ($700) and the 70-200 ($1,000) seemed to work fine on my camera, at least there was nothing that my 'new guy' eye caught as being weird.

I thought about going the prime route, but didn't want to deal with lots of changes. I live in North Florida and we head to Walt Disney World several times a year. I love being able to snap as I go and haven't done well with multiple lens changes so far. That being said, I am open to other thoughts so thank you for your input. I really hadn't considered looking for new, or other used lenses.

Lastly, while it wont happen anytime soon, I may upgrade to full frame one day. At that point, I'd already have good glass.


Gear List
Critique welcome. Editing ok. Thanks for looking

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,351 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 1383
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Jun 26, 2018 12:14 |  #4

Bardi wrote in post #18651706 (external link)
Hello all,
I'm sure you are all over the "What lens should I get?" question, but if you'll indulge me for a moment, I'd appreciate it.

I am on the newer side of photography, Canon owner for about a year and a half, and have only been 'serious' for about 6 months or so.

I have 2 crop bodies, a Rebel 2Ti and a 40D. So far my lens corral consists of 18-55 kit, 50mm 1.8, 28-135mm USM, 75-300mm 3.5-5.6.

I would like to step up to a fast lens. Currently I don't have a specific style, I enjoy street photography, some cityscape stuff, some people/candid, some low light areas, and I shoot my sister's running team races.

I have a friend who has a 24-70L 2.8 and a 70-200L 2.8 IS that are for sale. I know I don't NEED a new lens, but I have the opportunity to upgrade with glass that I personally know and I don't know how long that will be around.

Any input on a direction? Am I just falling into the GAS trap? I love the ability of the 50 at 1.8 in low light and my other lenses can't hang in that respect.

Thanks in advance for any input.

Given your current lenses and the styles you listed, I would jump on the 24-70; just keep in mind that 2.8 really isn't all that fast, either. It's just as fast as most zooms can go. If you want something different for lower light stuff, I'd say look into another prime or two; one wider and one longer than the 50...like, a 24 and 85. Those should be able to be had at f/1.4 or f/1.8 for reasonable amounts.

You'll want to bump up your 75-300 sooner than later, most likely, also; but, I'm not sure you'd find the size/weight of the 70-200 2.8 to be worth it. Either a better 70-300 or a flavor of the 70-200 f/4 would not be amiss there, however.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DC ­ Fan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,881 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 49
Joined Oct 2005
     
Jun 26, 2018 12:18 |  #5

Bardi wrote in post #18651706 (external link)
Hello all,
I'm sure you are all over the "What lens should I get?" question, but if you'll indulge me for a moment, I'd appreciate it.

I am on the newer side of photography, Canon owner for about a year and a half, and have only been 'serious' for about 6 months or so.

I have 2 crop bodies, a Rebel 2Ti and a 40D. So far my lens corral consists of 18-55 kit, 50mm 1.8, 28-135mm USM, 75-300mm 3.5-5.6.

I would like to step up to a fast lens. Currently I don't have a specific style, I enjoy street photography, some cityscape stuff, some people/candid, some low light areas, and I shoot my sister's running team races.

I have a friend who has a 24-70L 2.8 and a 70-200L 2.8 IS that are for sale. I know I don't NEED a new lens, but I have the opportunity to upgrade with glass that I personally know and I don't know how long that will be around.

Any input on a direction? Am I just falling into the GAS trap? I love the ability of the 50 at 1.8 in low light and my other lenses can't hang in that respect.

Thanks in advance for any input.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Actual image from a Canon T2i and a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens at f/2.8 and 182mm.
The combination of a shallow depth of field and a useful combination of focal lengths makes a fast 70-200mm lens always a good choice.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yellowt2
Senior Member
259 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Sep 2009
Post edited 8 months ago by yellowt2.
     
Jun 26, 2018 12:30 |  #6

Snydremark wrote in post #18651734 (external link)
Given your current lenses and the styles you listed, I would jump on the 24-70; just keep in mind that 2.8 really isn't all that fast, either. It's just as fast as most zooms can go. If you want something different for lower light stuff, I'd say look into another prime or two; one wider and one longer than the 50...like, a 24 and 85. Those should be able to be had at f/1.4 or f/1.8 for reasonable amounts.

You'll want to bump up your 75-300 sooner than later, most likely, also; but, I'm not sure you'd find the size/weight of the 70-200 2.8 to be worth it. Either a better 70-300 or a flavor of the 70-200 f/4 would not be amiss there, however.

I agree with all of this.


Again, the 24-70mm range is not my cup of tea (on crop), and the 70-200 f/2.8 is too big/heavy for me (I tried it and ended up selling it; stayed with my 70-300 IS instead), but that is a personal thing

If you've tried the lenses and like them you can't go wrong; they're both great lenses, and have proven themselves to countless photographers over the years

Also - keep in mind that used lenses hold their value pretty well; if you buy them, then change your mind 6 months from now, you'll be able to resell them for close to what you paid.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chuckmiller
Senior Member
Avatar
852 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 306
Joined May 2012
Location: Tampa, Florida and Daytona Beach, Florida USA
     
Jun 26, 2018 13:13 |  #7

If you have used them and you like them and the price is acceptable to you then buy them and enjoy them.


.
.
.
Retired from Fire/Rescue with 30 years on the job 1/05/2019

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bardi
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
101 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 62
Joined May 2018
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
     
Jun 26, 2018 13:20 |  #8

chuckmiller wrote in post #18651792 (external link)
If you have used them and you like them and the price is acceptable to you then buy them and enjoy them.

I think that's what gave me pause. I can rationalize anything if I think i need it. Here I'm trying to lean on some others knowledge. I have gone down the road of gear gathering in a few other hobbies and didn't want a repeat performance of that with this one.

I think perhaps I'll learn a bit more about the primes available after the post up top.


Gear List
Critique welcome. Editing ok. Thanks for looking

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,251 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2049
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
Post edited 8 months ago by Left Handed Brisket.
     
Jun 26, 2018 13:37 |  #9

I probably wouldn't invest in FF zoom lenses if I owned 2 crop cameras.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com …mm-f-1.8-DC-HSM-Lens.aspx (external link)

This ^ is an interesting option made for crop. 24mm at 2.8 on crop is snapshot territory, not that you can't be creative, but a truly fast zoom lens or prime is what I would be considering. Sigma 35 or 50mm Art lens might also appeal to you


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bardi
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
101 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 62
Joined May 2018
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
     
Jun 26, 2018 14:22 |  #10

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18651823 (external link)
I probably wouldn't invest in FF zoom lenses if I owned 2 crop cameras.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com …mm-f-1.8-DC-HSM-Lens.aspx (external link)

This ^ is an interesting option made for crop. 24mm at 2.8 on crop is snapshot territory, not that you can't be creative, but a truly fast zoom lens or prime is what I would be considering. Sigma 35 or 50mm Art lens might also appeal to you

Thank you for the recommendation. I also hadn't thought about branching out to other brands. I like that 1.8.


Gear List
Critique welcome. Editing ok. Thanks for looking

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
s1a1om
Senior Member
Avatar
507 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 451
Joined Jul 2013
Location: Hartford, CT, USA
     
Jun 26, 2018 18:07 |  #11

You will find as many suggestions here as you find people. That being said, you can't go wrong with either the 24-70 or 70-200. Personally, of those two I'd pick the 70-200. It's a great portrait lens and would also work very well for your sister's running team races.

Another option that nobody has brought up yet is Canon's 10-22. I love wide angle portraits. They're a lot of fun to play with and definitely have a unique feel. I've got the 16-35 on my full frame body (equivalent to the 10-22) and it is by far my most used lens. Great for fun portraits, landscapes, cityscapes, pet photography, etc. But it does make you think a bit differently than the other lenses. https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …0_22mm_f_3_5_4_​5_USM.html (external link)

Note the 10-22 also has a great reputation. Here's the photo sample thread for that lens: https://photography-on-the.net …ead.php?t=31225​5&page=442

For other wide angle work, you can also check out the 16-35 threads:
https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18650822
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1468822
https://photography-on-the.net …ead.php?t=41115​6&page=266


Constructive criticism is always appreciated.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,351 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 1383
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Jun 26, 2018 18:35 |  #12

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18651823 (external link)
I probably wouldn't invest in FF zoom lenses if I owned 2 crop cameras.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com …mm-f-1.8-DC-HSM-Lens.aspx (external link)

This ^ is an interesting option made for crop. 24mm at 2.8 on crop is snapshot territory, not that you can't be creative, but a truly fast zoom lens or prime is what I would be considering. Sigma 35 or 50mm Art lens might also appeal to you

I'll weigh in as a happy owner of that particular zoom. If the 18-35 range works for your shooting, that sucker is awesome; when I went to Paris, it allowed me to get shots in the museums/catacombs/cath​edrals that I would not have been able to get with any of my other gear. It's a bit "tanky" in size/weight, for what it is...but, I love having it in my arsenal if I know I'll be shooting in the dark ahead of time. If you find yourself shooting in darker settings where flash isn't an option, this is a good lens to consider if wanting a crop zoom.

The only reason I didn't throw it in the original post was that 18-35 is pretty short/wide; so you have to be standing very close to your subject if you're shooting portraits (and deal with the resulting perspective distortions) or be standing back and trying to include a fair amount of the surrounding environment. It is, also, ONLY for crop bodies.

s1a1om wrote in post #18651954 (external link)
You will find as many suggestions here as you find people. That being said, you can't go wrong with either the 24-70 or 70-200. Personally, of those two I'd pick the 70-200. It's a great portrait lens and would also work very well for your sister's running team races.

Another option that nobody has brought up yet is Canon's 10-22. I love wide angle portraits. They're a lot of fun to play with and definitely have a unique feel. I've got the 16-35 on my full frame body (equivalent to the 10-22) and it is by far my most used lens. Great for fun portraits, landscapes, cityscapes, pet photography, etc. But it does make you think a bit differently than the other lenses. https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …0_22mm_f_3_5_4_​5_USM.html (external link)

Note the 10-22 also has a great reputation. Here's the photo sample thread for that lens: https://photography-on-the.net …ead.php?t=31225​5&page=442

For other wide angle work, you can also check out the 16-35 threads:
https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18650822
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1468822
https://photography-on-the.net …ead.php?t=41115​6&page=266

The 10-22 is also a great, crop body lens for when you need/want to get truly wide (UWA). Also a happy owner of that particular lens for a number of years now. Again, if it fits the/a style of shooting that you're interested in, it's tough to go wrong with this one.

However, it's going to be very short for most of the types of shooting listed in the OP. It can be nice for the cityscape type shoots, but you would have (practically) to stand on the top of someone's shoes for most portrait framings/candids/stree​t shots; it's reasonably slow of aperture (3.5 at the widest), thus not great in low light unless you can do long shutter speeds; and your runners are going to be dots in the background for most sporting events due to how far back you generally have to be from the actual participants.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
s1a1om
Senior Member
Avatar
507 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 451
Joined Jul 2013
Location: Hartford, CT, USA
Post edited 8 months ago by s1a1om.
     
Jun 26, 2018 18:50 |  #13

Snydremark wrote in post #18651964 (external link)
but you would have (practically) to stand on the top of someone's shoes for most portrait framings/candids/stree​t shots

Yes, you do have to get close, but it isn't uncomfortably close depending on what type of shot you're going for. Head do make you get really close, but the OP already has a 50 1.8 that's good for that. Below are from my 16-35 on my 6D (same field of view as the 10-22 on a crop body). And there are many people that are much better photographers than me making good use of this focal length for portraits. That being said, you are right. It is definitely a different style of shot than most people are used to. That's probably why I have so much fun with it.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from s1a1om's gallery.


Constructive criticism is always appreciated.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bardi
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
101 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 62
Joined May 2018
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
     
Jun 26, 2018 19:05 |  #14

I am very grateful of all the responses so far. Thank you all for your honest opinions. I realize asking questions like this is akin to asking 'What's the best flavor ice cream' etc.

I should have perhaps clarified in the OP that I'm not looking for a single lens to fill any and all rolls possible, but something to compliment/ enhance what I already have going.

The 18-55 is a paperweight really at this point. I know some folks have been able to create some nice images with it, but it's not for me.

I still like the 50mm and use it. The 75-300 is really only used for the races and the occasional (I need to shoot that and it is far away).

The 28-135 is my all around lens currently and for the most part it does what I need, with the exception of low light.

I like the look of the 10-22 and while I don't do much of that style, I could potentially get into that.

If I go primes, what distance would YOU choose? 24? 35? 85? Some of these can be had for less than half of my other avenues.


Gear List
Critique welcome. Editing ok. Thanks for looking

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,351 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 1383
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Jun 26, 2018 19:20 |  #15

Bardi wrote in post #18651982 (external link)
I am very grateful of all the responses so far. Thank you all for your honest opinions. I realize asking questions like this is akin to asking 'What's the best flavor ice cream' etc.

I should have perhaps clarified in the OP that I'm not looking for a single lens to fill any and all rolls possible, but something to compliment/ enhance what I already have going.

The 18-55 is a paperweight really at this point. I know some folks have been able to create some nice images with it, but it's not for me.

I still like the 50mm and use it. The 75-300 is really only used for the races and the occasional (I need to shoot that and it is far away).

The 28-135 is my all around lens currently and for the most part it does what I need, with the exception of low light.

I like the look of the 10-22 and while I don't do much of that style, I could potentially get into that.

If I go primes, what distance would YOU choose? 24? 35? 85? Some of these can be had for less than half of my other avenues.

I can't say if it's just situational, particular to my movements/travels, but I've found that I *really* like 24mm on the crops over the years, as a mid range focal length. I've shot that for landscapes, environmental portraits, closeups of exceptionally cooperative (non-predatory) wildlife, baby/kid portraits, cityscapes, static car/plane displays, etc. I've long had 85 on my 'to do' list, to have a slightly longer reach for single subjects.

While 35mm is quite coveted and commonly used focal length, I have never been able to utilize that one well. It always feels like "I'm seeing and recording exactly what everyone else sees when they look at this thing." I would certainly choose one or the other of those two and supplement with an 85 if looking down the 'primes' route.

The nice thing is that with your current set, you can at least try out 24 and 35 for framings and see which works better with your eye/vision.

Of the options presented through this thread so far, I think 2 of the nicest combos you could come up with would the 18-35 1.8 + an 85mm prime or the 10-22 + 85 prime; depending on *how* wide you want to get.

And *all* of this is predicated on sticking with a crop body for the foreseeable future.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

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

1,417 views & 15 likes for this thread
New guy lens help
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 jovenbiinz
339 guests, 367 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.