I don't usually like to do this.... a little help?

Hi all,

With some mad money I squirreled away I'm looking to make some additions / upgrades to my kit. A 2nd body is in the works within the next 3 months - it'll either be a 30D or 40D. What I want some help with is deciding what makes the most sense for me to do - more so, help me hash out what better serves needs than wants.

Current kit: 17-40L, Tamron 17-50 F/2.8, 70-200 F/4L, 35 f/2.0, 100 f/2.8 macro, 430EX flash. I'm letting the 17-40 go as it doesn't get much use with the tamron being faster, having more reach, and very sharp. Also, I have no plans at this time to upgrade my 70-200 to an F/2.8 version

The Situation: I've been doing quite a bit of paid photo work as of late - commercial, events coverage, weddings, and a few portraits. I want to round out my equipment so that I can be more versatile and better serve clients first, and to expand my own personal shooting second. For personal shooting I like to do land/seascapes, abandoned buildings, macro, and abstracts. Right now my equipment needs for personal shooting have to come secondary to business needs. The most obvious need is something a bit long and fast for when the lights get dim during events, especially for wedding ceremonies, however I have a nagging urge for UWA and think I could use it pretty creatively for client work.

To see my work check out:
www.clikpic.com/bdorma​n (this is more relevant to client work)
www.pbase.com/bdorman (more personal shooting)

The choices:
a) 85mm F/1.8 for speed/reach/portraits along with the EF-S 10-22 for landscapes, buildings, interiors, creative shots

b) 135mm F/2 L for speed/reach/portraits & narrow dof shots along with the 1.4x tc to give me close to 200mm @ F/2.8. I know it's a bit long on a crop cam but I'm strangely drawn to this lens, so sharp with such great color and background blur.

c) 85mm F/1.8 & 200mm F/2.8L - again not the most useful focal length, but this is to supplement my slower 70-200

d) 85mm F/1.8 & 580EX Flash

e) your suggestions?

FWIW I'm not looking to spend too much more than $1K.

Cheers.

Your post struck me because I'm in a similar situation. Based on you desire to fill needs for business I'd go with d. The 580ex speedlite now comes with a rebate. I think the creative possibilities with off camera flash is great. I love my 85mm f1.8. You would have a little extra $ for off camera flash equipment.

E) Sell the 430 and then buy the 85mm 1.8, Sigma 10-20 and 530EX (the original version)

Thanks for the input fellas. My wallet & head say the 85mm f/1.8 and something else, but I keep coming back to just plain wanting that 135mm F/2

Edited to add that I've changed my mind, I'm holding on to the 17-40L as it's just that good. The only time I use the Tamron is usually for weddings. The more I think about it the more I think I might be satisfied with 17mm as my widest as well.

Looks like I'm considering the 85 f/1.8 + 580EX vs. the 135 f/2L...

The 135 just looks SO good, seems like a lens that would open alot of creativity. I'm particular inspired by one of POTN's members Jia Wang (http://www.pbase.com/j​iawang/root) He has some very nice work with the 135 along with some other awesome work.

Rathke - I have some off camera gear now that I use with my 430ex, using two flashes would be fun but I must admit I use flash mostly when doing weddings or macro, otherwise I prefer available light.

I appreciate the advice so far, I don't get the opportunity to add gear too often so when I do I'm a bit neurotic and agonize over the choices!

Dorman wrote in post #4156689
Edited to add that I've changed my mind, I'm holding on to the 17-40L as it's just that good. The only time I use the Tamron is usually for weddings. The more I think about it the more I think I might be satisfied with 17mm as my widest as well.

Looks like I'm considering the 85 f/1.8 + 580EX vs. the 135 f/2L...

The 135 just looks SO good, seems like a lens that would open alot of creativity. I'm particular inspired by one of POTN's members Jia Wang (http://www.pbase.com/j​iawang/root) He has some very nice work with the 135 along with some other awesome work.

Rathke - I have some off camera gear now that I use with my 430ex, using two flashes would be fun but I must admit I use flash mostly when doing weddings or macro, otherwise I prefer available light.

I appreciate the advice so far, I don't get the opportunity to add gear too often so when I do I'm a bit neurotic and agonize over the choices!

Greetings from Dartmouth!

I like the idea that you've decided to keep the 17-40. A Canon L lens should be working and working well for many years, and I have my doubts about third party lenses. They may be as sharp as a Canon out of the box, but I have heard too many stories about the things breaking down a few years later.

You mentioned in your first post that you have no intention of getting a 70-200 f2.8, and yet everything else that you want on the long side seems to be a quest for speed. I think that you'd solve any number of problems if you were to sell your 70-200 f4 and bought the f2.8. I have and love the 70-200 f2.8L, and it's the non IS version. IS would be fine, but the non IS was a lot less money and as I've written many times before I use a monopod or tripod with this lens and would with the IS version as well. To me it's all about the weight, and keeping it off of my arms. Since either of the two lenses would be on a monopod, and that a monopod is a form of IS; then the IS version of the lens won't do all that much for me. The non IS isn't all that much more expensive than the 135 f2 and I would expect that you could do a lot of your financing for the 2.8 with the sale of your f4.

That brings us to primes. Are they sharper? Probably. Can they be sharper than my 70-200? Possibly, but in my real world my 70-200 is breathtakingly sharp; so the sharpness of the 135 is likely to beyond significant decimal places, if you follow me. And try making a 135 a 140 so that the composition is better.

I shot weddings for a decade with Mamiya 645's and prime lenses. Then I went to Canon digital and realized what shots I could now get with the zooms. Before this experience I was happy with the Mamiya and primes, but the Canon zooms opened the door to shots that were previously impossible. Now make no mistake, these Canon zooms aren't dogs, but how does a Canon zooms shot that you got, compare to a prime lens shot that you missed becasue you had the wrong prime on your camera?

Years ago I was flamed by suggesting that a Mamiya RB67 was perhaps a little too awkward to use at a wedding. The flamer suggested that I just didn't want to give the best quality I could to my clients. I responded by asking him why he wasn't shooting weddings in 4x5, or even 8x10 since that was obviously better quality. He and I both knew that a sheet film camera was inappropriate at a wedding. The point was and is that I could get shots with the 645 that I couldn't with an RB, and there are shots that I can get with a zoom lens that I can't with a prime. And if you can't get the shot nothing else matters.

Dorman wrote in post #4148664
Current kit: 17-40L, Tamron 17-50 F/2.8, 70-200 F/4L, 35 f/2.0, 100 f/2.8 macro, 430EX flash. I'm letting the 17-40 go as it doesn't get much use with the tamron being faster, having more reach, and very sharp. Also, I have no plans at this time to upgrade my 70-200 to an F/2.8 version

The choices:
a) 85mm F/1.8 for speed/reach/portraits along with the EF-S 10-22 for landscapes, buildings, interiors, creative shots

b) 135mm F/2 L for speed/reach/portraits & narrow dof shots along with the 1.4x tc to give me close to 200mm @ F/2.8. I know it's a bit long on a crop cam but I'm strangely drawn to this lens, so sharp with such great color and background blur.

c) 85mm F/1.8 & 200mm F/2.8L - again not the most useful focal length, but this is to supplement my slower 70-200

d) 85mm F/1.8 & 580EX Flash

e) your suggestions?

FWIW I'm not looking to spend too much more than $1K.

Cheers.

My suggestion is the following:

I would definately get the 85mm f/1.8. It's a fast lens and in my opinion, produces amazing BOKEH! Search around and you'll find the same answer, CREAMY, RICH, MMM MMM Good BOKEH! Great Portrait.

Then sell the 70-200 f/4 for a 70-200 f/2.8 IS. I currently have the 70-200/f/4 IS and the 70-200 retains its value so selling it won't be too hard.

Lastly, if you don't have a Speedlight, I suggest you get one as well.

So lenses overall. 85mm f/1.8, 70-200 f/2.8 IS, and Speedlight. I love fast lenses and I won't go f/4 with any lens, unless I have to or have no choice and if IS is available, then I will definately get that version.

Minimizing lens changes is a must for me. Having two bodies is a must for me as well and should not have to change my lenses in most cases.

As far as Tamron's/Sigma, you can't really go wrong with them as well. I am just done with wasting money and I'm just going to get BUILD QUALITY, FAST LENS and not a lot of overlapping. Get the PRimes for specific use and you should be set. At least that's what I am doing.

Tough choice between

a) 85mm F/1.8 for speed/reach/portraits along with the EF-S 10-22 for landscapes, buildings, interiors, creative shots

and

d) 85mm F/1.8 & 580EX Flash

The 135L might be too long for most situations
The 10-22 is bread and butter for architecture & landscapes on APSC
The 580EX is a very nice add on providing more power and dual flash application along with your 430EX.

Hmmmm... I might go for the 85 + 10-22 in the end.

If you're planning to do weddings:
1. Sell everything but the macro lens, the 430EX, and the Tamron 17-50, which can be used for backup purposes. The autofocus is a little slow for weddings.
2. Purchase a 17-55IS, 85 1.8, and 135L.
3. Buy a used 580EX.
4. Save your money for the 70-200IS. You really need IS for dimly lit churches.

I know it's more than you want to spend, but the outlay for a basic wedding kit is around 10K.

Viewed your Commercial site. Love the Fine Arts link. I feel your pain. Your creative captures are fantastic. Looks like you want to do some money gigs. I think the 135mm f2L would expand the obvious creative skills you pocess. The 10-22mm would also fit your style. As for gigs the flash and 85 f1.8 fit. I think I'd look at how the "want" (135mm F2) could work into the business side of the equation. You show tremendous creative results. I think many of us are torn between the want side of equipment and the need side to offset costs with some revenue. Bye the way, I want the 135L as well! Probably will buy the 70-200mm f4 IS for needs reasons. But I want the 135L.

Hey

I would go with b from your choices.

Cheers

DaveG - greetings, nice to see another Nova Scotian on the boards. I just couldn't go through with selling the 17-40 - for everything aside from weddings & portraits it has been my bread & butter lens, it has easily given me over 80% of my favorite images. It has to stay! I'll give the 70-200 F/2.8 some consideration as it would be very flexible, but I do really like the small size and lightweight F/4.

Rathke - Thank you for the kind words about my work and creativity, sadly that kind of work isn't what brings in alot of the $$$ right now! In a way I almost prefer to buy gear that pleases my need to do the work I WANT to do, even though I should be looking at what will give me a return on my investment. I do think the 135 F/2 could be worked into what I shoot for pleasure as well as what I shoot for money - it wouldn't be as flexible as say a fast 70-200 but heck, I'm of the mind that not everyone needs the same gear to do the same sort of jobs.

Liza - thanks for the input, one piece at a time for now - looking to get more photo business going but also saving/paying for my own wedding and house in the near future. Someday down the road when I have a more steady income stream from weddings I'll probably add the 70-200 F/2.8 IS.

Also thanks to JJ, Dragos, NutsnBolts for the feedback!

This hasn't gotten any clearer yet folks.

I think most everyone agrees the 135L is one of the best lens that Canon produces. Boken, AF speed, Sharpness, and Image Quality are superior.

It boils down to seeing your goal and investing the $1000 on which equipment best gets you there. After all, if the 135 L does not fit the picture, the sucess of reaching your goal can result in funds to purchase the dream lens later. That would make it sweet

That is certainly true Rathke. In terms of return on investment I could probably use the same amount of money to buy a 2nd flash (580EX) and 85 F/1.8 and some other odds and ends and then buy the 135 F/2 L much later down the road.

Unfortunately it's so much more fun to buy simply what you WANT!

It should be said, I'm looking at a long fast prime such as the 85 and 135 for two reasons:

1) to SUPPLEMENT my 70-200 F/4 until I'm in a better position to have an F/2.8 zoom for weddings - more specifically I want to use it for ceremonies where I can't get as close as I'd like and the lighting isn't the greatest. My thinking for the 135 is that I'd have F/2 @ 135mm and F/2.8 at close to 200mm with a TC.

2) For portraiture and commercial detail shots

Dorman wrote in post #4155744
Thanks for the input fellas. My wallet & head say the 85mm f/1.8 and something else, but I keep coming back to just plain wanting that 135mm F/2

get it