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 07 Apr 2008 (Monday) 10:20
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Buying my first L glass, cant descide

 
Double ­ Negative
*sniffles*
Avatar
10,523 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Mar 2006
Location: New York, USA
     
Apr 09, 2008 09:59 |  #46

Don't take this the wrong way, but if you can't decide on which focal lengths you need, what makes you think you need an L?

What kind of sports are you looking to shoot? That'll determine your focal length needs. The 24-70mm is more of a "walkaround" than the 70-200mm.


La Vida Leica! (external link)LitPixel Galleries (external link) -- 1v-HS/1d Mk IIn w/E-1 & Op/Tech straps
15mm f/2.8, 14mm f/2.8L, 24mm f/1.4L II, 35mm f/1.4L, 50mm f/1.2L, 85mm f/1.2L II, 135mm f/2.0L
16-35mm f/2.8L, 24-70mm f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS, Extender EF 1.4x II & 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
shutterfiend
Goldmember
2,058 posts
Joined Feb 2007
Location: NJ
     
Apr 09, 2008 10:14 |  #47

Mystwalker wrote in post #5282014 (external link)
Primes may be "god" in term of IQ, but you are still "human" - how fast can you swap lens?

Personally, I do not like switching lens. I like that less then letting my feet do the zooming :)

Looks like OP already has short/med range covered? I say 70-200.

You are forced to shoot differently with primes. You don't swap lenses when you want to change your FOV, you simply change your "point of view".

The inability to exercise control over FOV forces the photographer to be more creative in their approach, IMO.


https://photography-on-the.net …p=7812587&postc​ount=91776

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
robbyh
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
190 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Fresno, CA
     
Apr 10, 2008 20:05 |  #48

Double Negative wrote in post #5292715 (external link)
Don't take this the wrong way, but if you can't decide on which focal lengths you need, what makes you think you need an L?

What kind of sports are you looking to shoot? That'll determine your focal length needs. The 24-70mm is more of a "walkaround" than the 70-200mm.

Really there is no reason I need any lens since I dont get paid to take pictures. I could easly do with my sony P&S.
But I enjoy this as a hobby and I fell its better to have good glass that can be used on better cameras if I grow, or will still hold a good value if i descide to sell later on.

Oh btw I ended up renting the 70-200 f/2.8IS. Should be here Monday and I'll have two weeks to see how I like it. Then I'll try the 24-70 or the 16-35.


Flickr (external link)
500px (external link)
6D, 24-105 f/4 L | YN 565 |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
VladDracule
Senior Member
646 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2007
     
Apr 10, 2008 21:49 |  #49

alot of info in hereit looks like

i bought the 70-200 f/4L as my first L

the reason beeing is a do only sports for now.

i do have a 28-135 Is that came as a kit lens with my 40d but i have yet to use it. the 50 1.8 and 70-200 f/4l are the only things that touch my camera. dont get me wrong the 28-135 is good lens but its just not what i needed. the question to ask yourself is what focal length would u use the most? do you wish you had more reach most of the time? or does the kit lens cover mostly what you need (in terms of focal length)

as far as for walkarounds im finding myself leaning more towards a prime due to the sharpness price and DOF control


Canon 40D, 70-200 f/4L, 28-135 IS, 50 f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
r1ch
Senior Member
395 posts
Joined Sep 2005
     
Apr 10, 2008 21:57 as a reply to  @ VladDracule's post |  #50

It depends on what you are shooting mostly, but in your position, I would get the 70-200. You have the kit lens and a 50mm to me the 24-70 would be redundant, get something that you don't have to cover the full spectrum. The kit lens when used at f8-16 and not at either extreme of wide angle or telephoto can get some good pictures, and the 50mm is a good lens. 70-200 all the way.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
doidinho
Goldmember
Avatar
3,352 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Kenmore, Washington
     
Apr 10, 2008 22:48 |  #51

robbyh wrote in post #5303604 (external link)
Really there is no reason I need any lens since I dont get paid to take pictures. I could easly do with my sony P&S.
But I enjoy this as a hobby and I fell its better to have good glass that can be used on better cameras if I grow, or will still hold a good value if i descide to sell later on.

Oh btw I ended up renting the 70-200 f/2.8IS. Should be here Monday and I'll have two weeks to see how I like it. Then I'll try the 24-70 or the 16-35.

As long as your renting glass you really should try out the 17-55IS. Another option would be the Tamron 17-50 (for about half the price of the 17-55, w/o IS, and w/ similar IQ). This focal length is the bread and butter of most photogs w/ a crop body.

Don't get hung up on just buying "L" glass; primes and some 3rd party lenses (like the Tammy) will give you the excellent IQ and may better serve you needs.

A Tamron 17-50 and a Canon 70-200 f/4 L would give you an awesome focal range, stellar IQ, and cost about the same as the 24-70L alone.


Robert McCadden
My Flickr (external link)
MM (external link)
5DMKII, Rebel xti, 24-105 f/4L, Canon 70-200 f/4L, Canon 17-40.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkoutdoor
Goldmember
Avatar
1,874 posts
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Feeding my camera somewhere in Western Washington
     
Apr 10, 2008 23:03 |  #52

robbyh wrote in post #5277662 (external link)
If you had to pick between the 24-70 and the 70-200 f/2.8 (non is) which would it be and why?

Those are the 2 I'm trying to desice between. Currently I dont shoot anything specific. I would like to try some sports, but I also would like to have a good walk around lens that is versatile.

If those are the two choices it would come down to whether you will shoot more inside or outside, or if you can't give up something (both are a compromise). The lesser compromise for an outside shooter would be the 70-200 because it can do some moderately long range stuff and 70mm is still workable for portraits. It's barely workable inside if the quarters are cramped. You'll always be able to use it for head and torso shots, but you'd need a bunch of room to get a full length or group shot with it indoors. Outside you'd just back up and do whatever you like.

On the other hand, the 24-70 is all about indoors and can do some wider stuff for landscapes if that's what you like, but it will be practically useless for sports or action and it is completely useless for anything longish. It's even a compromise in low light. It's a great portrait lens and a fine wedding lens if you have flash available. Other than that it is not especially versatile IMO.


Canon ~ 7D, 1D MkIIn, 5D, 20D, 10D, 100-400L IS, 70-200 2.8L IS, 24-105 f4L IS, 17-40 f4L, 135mm f2L, 85mm 1.8, 50mm 1.4, 50mm 2.5 macro, Ext. tubes, TC's 1.4 & 2.0, Feisol 3441-S CF Tpod, Gitzo Traveler Mpod, Acratech ballhead, 550EX, 200EG bag, Epson Pro 3800 printer.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,042 posts
Likes: 1117
Joined Nov 2005
Location: San Diego County, California, USA
     
Apr 11, 2008 00:19 |  #53

I mostly agree with sando...

sando wrote in post #5277686 (external link)
With an XTI? I'd go for the 17-55 2.8 IS instead. You'll find 24-70 not wide enough at the wide end on a crop body.

Then I'd save up for the 70-200 2.8 IS.

I have both the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 24-70 f/2.8L lenses and I find the 17-55mm lens a more versatile glass on a 1.6x camera. It is especially better on a Rebel (series) camera because of its lighter weight. IMO, the 24-70L doesn't balance well with that heavy lens. A battery grip helps but, the lighter 17-55mm lens is the ticket for the small Rebel (series) cameras.

I mesh my 17-55mm f/2.8L with a 70-200mm f/4L IS lens. These two are a super combination. The f/4L IS is a lot lighter than the f/2.8L and matches with a Rebel (series) camera better because of its weight.

I carry my 17-55mm and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses everywhere on 2 bodies. I think that I would seriously balk at carrying the weight of the f/2.8L IS lens on some of my more rugged photo excursions; especially combined with the weight of the 24-70L lens.

I don't usually require a wider lens. I can make do very well for most shooting opportunities with the 17mm as my widest focal length and I don't miss the range between 55 and 70mm one bit.

The f/2.8L might be a smidgen better for isolating individual athletes but, for general overall shooting - there is not much you cannot do with the lighter weight f/4L. Get the f/4L IS lens AND an extra body. You could get a used extra body for the difference in price between a f/4L IS and an f/2.8L IS 70-200mm lens..

Those two lenses on two bodies really make one heck of a wonderful setup.


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JoYork
Goldmember
Avatar
3,079 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Dec 2007
Location: York, England
     
Apr 11, 2008 06:00 |  #54

RPCrowe wrote in post #5305127 (external link)
Those two lenses on two bodies really make one heck of a wonderful setup.

Agreed.


Jo
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JimAskew
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,376 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 197
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Springfield, VA
     
Apr 11, 2008 06:07 |  #55

sando wrote in post #5277686 (external link)
With an XTI? I'd go for the 17-55 2.8 IS instead. You'll find 24-70 not wide enough at the wide end on a crop body.

Then I'd save up for the 70-200 2.8 IS.

If you just don't have to own an "L" right now then Sando is offering good advice.

I have both the 17-55MM EF-S IS and the 24-70MM EF L and I use the 17-55MM EF-S IS far more on my 30D...it is a great street and low light lens. IQ is equal to the 24-70MM IMHO.


Jim -- I keep the G5X in the Glove Box just in case!
7D, G5X, 10-22MM EF-S, 17-55MM f/2.8 EF-S IS, 24-105MM f/4 EF L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
S.Horton
worship my useful and insightful comments
Avatar
18,051 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 117
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Royersford, PA
     
Apr 11, 2008 06:29 |  #56

timnosenzo wrote in post #5277672 (external link)
I'd probably pick the 24-70 because I use that range more.

+1, and it is smaller..........


Sam - TF Says Ishmael
http://midnightblue.sm​ugmug.com (external link) 
Want your title changed?Dream On! (external link)

:cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Double ­ Negative
*sniffles*
Avatar
10,523 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Mar 2006
Location: New York, USA
     
Apr 11, 2008 10:28 |  #57

Sounds like reasonable thinking. I'm fond of saying, "spend money on the glass - bodies come and go" myself. Buy a lens, a good lens - once. You'll have those for a lifetime whereas bodies will likely get upgraded from time to time.

IMO, the 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200 is a fantastic combo. Covers a huge range and the quality is top-notch throughout. Bonus that the filters are all 77mm and they're all weathersealed.

robbyh wrote in post #5303604 (external link)
Really there is no reason I need any lens since I dont get paid to take pictures. I could easly do with my sony P&S.
But I enjoy this as a hobby and I fell its better to have good glass that can be used on better cameras if I grow, or will still hold a good value if i descide to sell later on.

Oh btw I ended up renting the 70-200 f/2.8IS. Should be here Monday and I'll have two weeks to see how I like it. Then I'll try the 24-70 or the 16-35.


La Vida Leica! (external link)LitPixel Galleries (external link) -- 1v-HS/1d Mk IIn w/E-1 & Op/Tech straps
15mm f/2.8, 14mm f/2.8L, 24mm f/1.4L II, 35mm f/1.4L, 50mm f/1.2L, 85mm f/1.2L II, 135mm f/2.0L
16-35mm f/2.8L, 24-70mm f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS, Extender EF 1.4x II & 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pixelharmony
Senior Member
Avatar
857 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Chicago
     
Apr 11, 2008 10:35 |  #58

"decide" not "descide".

I picked up my Sigma 24-70 at a great price and love the lens! I would trade this in a heartbeat for a 24-70L. From what I've read from lurking these forums the 17-55 is a wonderful lens, though not tagged "L" it's performance is up to par with L quality glass.

The 24-105L is also a forum favorite, but it all depends on what you need for you avg subject matter.


Eugene Kim
5D Mark II . Sigma 50mm f1.4
R.I.P - D700, D300, D200, 40D, D50

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
robbyh
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
190 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Fresno, CA
     
Apr 14, 2008 18:03 |  #59

Well the 70-200 just arrived.. I cant wait to get off work and try it out. Actually I think I'll be leaving a little early today ;)
But boy is this a heavy lens. I can see how shooting with this one for an extended period will require a mono pod or something.


Flickr (external link)
500px (external link)
6D, 24-105 f/4 L | YN 565 |

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

4,600 views & 0 likes for this thread
Buying my first L glass, cant descide
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 blueswan
821 guests, 192 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.