What will be my most logical step Cam or Lens

I checked out freddycr's stuff. Now THAT is where I am going. I have a new hero.

aubiecat wrote in post #7947986
I checked out freddycr's stuff. Now THAT is where I am going. I have a new hero.

Yeah, now you just need the girls he shoots.

I'm not sure what lenses he shoots though.

aubiecat wrote in post #7947986
I checked out freddycr's stuff. Now THAT is where I am going. I have a new hero.

You're welcome....

And in my opinion, Freddy stays on the right side of the line between "art & beauty" and "cheap, not-so-nice" G&N photography.

A great inspiration.

50D + 70-200 f/2.8 IS will do you just fine. But start thinking lighting as well. If it's mostly outside look at reflectors and scrims, which ought to be cheaper than getting a decent strobe setup. Lighting is at least 1/2 the battle.

Brett wrote in post #7948091
Yeah, now you just need the girls he shoots.

I'm not sure what lenses he shoots though.

Yea, the girls, I am sure they will come. I already have girls willing to volunteer and there is a major university right down the road as well.

skygod44 wrote in post #7948122
You're welcome....

And in my opinion, Freddy stays on the right side of the line between "art & beauty" and "cheap, not-so-nice" G&N photography.

A great inspiration.

I totally agree, I like the art of it all. That is what is attractive to me.

aubiecat wrote in post #7950484
I totally agree, I like the art of it all. That is what is attractive to me.

*cough* *cough* *bullsh*t*

timbop wrote in post #7950667
*cough* *cough* *bullsh*t*

Oh you must be talking about the "other" portfolio.

Brett wrote in post #7947560
Best advice yet. You're going to be shooting models in studio? Primes all the way. IQ trumps versatility in the studio. I wouldn't spend $2500 on two zooms when I could buy an 85L and 135L for about the same. If it's a small studio, replace the 135L with the 50L or Sigma 50/1.4.

50 1.4 sigma won't work on full frame

When I had a 20D the 24-70L was my portrait lens. now that I have a different format (1.3) the 24-70L fits even better for portraits. If I had a FF format I would not have that lens, I would have to use primes to cover the AOVs I would want. Befor one puts a good bit of money in lenses, one neds to know what format will ne usedd.

In my humble opinion...

Light before Lenses

Lenses before Bodies.

Having light when/where/how you want it and knowing how to manipulate and control it to me is far more rewarding than anything else.

JCH77Yanks wrote in post #7952244
In my humble opinion...

Light before Lenses

Lenses before Bodies.

Having light when/where/how you want it and knowing how to manipulate and control it to me is far more rewarding than anything else.

That is the advice I need. Considering the lenses I have which prime would you get first 70-200 or 24-70? I will be using them outdoors as much as indoors.

I have the 50D and 5d.

With the gear I have I'd grab my 5D without a question if I had to get the best prints. I will say that I am happy with the IQ of the 50D. Critically speaking there is an advantage of a FF sensor for "your" needs.

For outdoors I'd use the 70-200 and a prime or two like the 85, 50mm.

IMO with the primes you can achieve something more special compared to using a zoom like the 24-70L. The faster glass gives you to opportunity to "pop" the subject more if you please or stop it down to even f/2.8 with sharper images compared to a 24-70L used wideopen.

Primes are wonderful for poised shots where you have some time to compose. The IQ of the 70-200 is excellent and you can get great bokeh with such a long lens.

You will get alot of opinions and views. I would go with what suites your style.

aubiecat wrote in post #7956281
That is the advice I need. Considering the lenses I have which prime would you get first 70-200 or 24-70? I will be using them outdoors as much as indoors.

Umm... neither of those are primes, they're both zooms.

If you're truly in the market for a prime, I would recommend the 85/1.8 or 85L for combined indoor/outdoor use, especially on a crop-sensor camera. I don't own one, but I've used one, and I think it's a nice focal length for general purpose portraiture.

If, on the other hand you were asking about which zoom lens to get first, I think the 70-200 is the way to go if you can only have one. Your effective focal length range will be 112 - 320mm, vs. 38 - 112 mm of the 24-70. You also get the benefit of lens compression with the 70-200, and can shoot from further away, which may make some models more comfortable.

fritzk3 wrote in post #7956839
If, on the other hand you were asking about which zoom lens to get first, I think the 70-200 is the way to go if you can only have one. Your effective focal length range will be 112 - 320mm, vs. 38 - 112 mm of the 24-70. You also get the benefit of lens compression with the 70-200, and can shoot from further away, which may make some models more comfortable.

I realize I need primes but the 70-200 and the 24-70 will give me flexibility till I can acquire primes. Believe me I am a collector. I will have several lenses before it is said and done.
The info on focal length is good stuff thanks. I hear nothing but good feedback from everyone on the 70-200,except for the weight.

Well a few months later and I am almost there.
Got the 5D MkII, 70-200 f/2.8, 100mm f/2.8 macro.
Just missed a hell of a deal on a 24-70. I may just buy a new one since they are $1190.00 at Amazon.
Lights are next.......