yuriyo923 Goldmember  2,284 posts Likes: 1 Joined Nov 2007 Location: US More info | May 11, 2008 13:22 | #1 So I'm goint to Hawaii for a little getaway soon. All I got right now is 17-40L and 12-24 30D and 20D IR converted. I want to take both bodies so I can take some nice IR shots.. I'll take my 12-24. Do I need 17-40? I was thinking of selling it and getting 28-70L. Also thinking about getting 85 f/1.8 or Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 for portrait shots and some closeup shots... Canon 5D2 ~ 40D + 17-50mm in da booth!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
DStanic Cream of the Crop 6,148 posts Likes: 7 Joined Oct 2007 Location: Canada More info | May 11, 2008 14:17 | #2 Instead of the $$ spend on 28-70L, what about the Sigma 24-60 f/2.8? It's only $220 and a fanstastic lens for that price, in both IQ and build. I'm waiting for my Sigma 70-200 in the mail, I can't wait to use it!!! This will be my pair for an upcoming wedding this summer. Both lenses together will run you about $1000 total. Sony A6000, 16-50PZ, 55-210, 35mm 1.8 OSS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
I had tamron 28-75 before and I like it.. but after trying out 17-40L, I like L Canon 5D2 ~ 40D + 17-50mm in da booth!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Lestat Mostly Lurking  16 posts Joined Sep 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia More info | May 14, 2008 06:33 | #4 Just got back from my trip to Maui and Honolulu. Took my 10-20, 16-35, and 70-200, with my 40D. Used the 16-35 daily, 10-20 occasionally and the 70-200 only for shooting whales and the last night on Maui's Luau (which weirdly the on body flash worked great for?!?!?!?! since my 580ex batteries died (who would of thought the on body was good for any thing? Not me.). Most day trips I relied on the 16-35 for almost everything, a few landscapes with the wide angle, tripod mounted, but rarely anything with the 70-200. This is the way the world ends,This is the way the world ends,This is the way the world ends, Not with a bang but a whimper.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Canonswhitelensesrule Goldmember  3,648 posts Likes: 13 Joined Jan 2008 Location: Surrey, B.C. More info | May 14, 2008 19:09 | #5 If you're a fan of beach "scenery" the 70-200 will prove to be invaluable. It would also be nice for sunset photos where you'd get a little larger image of the sun in the photo, than you would with the wide angle lenses. Photographers do it in 1/1,000th of a second...but the memory lasts forever!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
May 17, 2008 11:38 | #6 Lestat wrote in post #5521337  Just got back from my trip to Maui and Honolulu. Took my 10-20, 16-35, and 70-200, with my 40D. Used the 16-35 daily, 10-20 occasionally and the 70-200 only for shooting whales and the last night on Maui's Luau (which weirdly the on body flash worked great for?!?!?!?! since my 580ex batteries died (who would of thought the on body was good for any thing? Not me.). Most day trips I relied on the 16-35 for almost everything, a few landscapes with the wide angle, tripod mounted, but rarely anything with the 70-200. Hope that helps a little, kind of random. thanks.. that does help alot.. Canon 5D2 ~ 40D + 17-50mm in da booth!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 2859 guests, 158 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
