flash first or lens?

cant decide if i should get my 580exii or the 70-200 f4l next.. hhhmmm, any advice? i have a 5d with only the 50mm 1.8 as of now.

What are your other lenses? From your sig it seems you only own the 50/1.8, so I would start with a more normal lens, like the 24-70 you are looking to buy.

First off, I would not get the 70-200 f4L (non-IS), I'd recomment the 70-200 f4L IS. Its a much better lens. And as an owner of 2 580's. I'd still say get the 70-200 f/4L IS before getting one. Having just a 50/1.8 with a 5D is a) limiting and b) a low-quality lens for that camera.

What you could do is get the 70-200 f/4L IS and a cheapo flash for now. Theres a very nice cheapo flash from Vivitar now... which is very similar to the Canon 220EX but with the added versatility of bounce flash... the model is the Vivitar DF22. It costs $35 you can't go wrong with it. Then when you put together the scratch for the 580EX II, get that.

and it seems you can get the Vivitar DF22 for $29.84 at Wal-Mart.

Wal-mart? What?

This is a tough one. Only having a 50mm f/1.8 is very limiting. Normally I recommend a flash as an essential item to get quickly but f/1.8 usually means you can live without flash. Since you only have one focal length, I'd say get another lens first. If you're not opposed to 3rd party lenses both the Sigma 24-70 and the Tamron 28-75 are great alternatives to the Canon 24-70. There are several versions of the Sigma lens. The newest sounds really nice because it has HSM but it's nearly the price of the Canon. I have an older version and I love it. These lenses can be had for around $400. Then there are third party flashes as mentioned. Sigma makes a 500 Super and a 530 Super that are VERY close to the Canon flashes in terms of functionality at a significant reduction in price. With buying 3rd party you could get both a lens and a flash for the cost of the Canon lens.

Also both Tamron and Sigma sell 70-200 lenses and the cost of there 2.8 lenses is about the price of Canon's f/4. I love my sigma 70-200 f/2.8

If you are intent on Canon, I'd say buy the 24-70 or 70-200 first. It all depends on what you want to shoot.

the older 24-70 DG EX Macro from Sigma isn't on the same level as the new HSM version or the Canon L. But its a nice lens for $400. Having handled the HSM the other week, I can tell you its on par with the 24-70L its a VERY attractive lens. Its more compact, its finished nicely, the build quality is great, the AF is fast (HSM). The only possible gripe would be the 82mm filter thread. But it doesn't bother me.

Tamron 70-200 = JUNK. Its the slowest zoom you can pay $700 for.

ngrohosky,
It depends on what you want to shoot. Give us some ideas what you like to shoot with your 5D and 50mm and that will help us understand if a flash or 70-200mm would better fit

ngrohosky wrote in post #7567214
cant decide if i should get my 580exii or the 70-200 f4l next.. hhhmmm, any advice? i have a 5d with only the 50mm 1.8 as of now.

Interesting. I always say flash before lens, if you don't own one already. In your case, I think you might be better off getting the 70-200, unless you are shooting indoors or portraits mostly, than forget the lens and get the flash.

Flash=Only shooting indoors 50% of the time or more.
Lens=If you are shooting outdoors 50% of the time or more.

I share the same opinion, more or less, as Sean with reservations pointed out by John.

Your stated line says 70-200 f/4, but your below sig line says you want 70-200 f/2.8. Which one is your true wishful lens?

Agree with others. Buy a good lens FIRST, then the flash. The lens purchase will open up way more opportunities than what you'd have with the same 50mm and a flash.

dave

John_B wrote in post #7567783
ngrohosky,
It depends on what you want to shoot. Give us some ideas what you like to shoot with your 5D and 50mm and that will help us understand if a flash or 70-200mm would better fit

agreed, what you shoot or WANT to shoot would be the best indicator of at your next purchase should be.

thank you so much for the input! i shoot mostly outdoors, things like portraits, high school senior photos, and hopefully weddings soon, but for that i want the 24-70, which i m also currently saving for. i cant decide between the four different canon 70-200 lenses because i dont know how great the difference is between them all. IS, i almost feel i can do without. but i feel i might need the 2.8 later on for weddings HELP and while were on the topic, does everyone agree that the sigma 24-70 is a good quality lens? or should i just save for the canon? thanks for all your help!!!

If you are looking to go "pro" I would say save for the Canon. I love my Sigma but it isn't an L. In terms of the 70-200 the f/4L is considered a very fine lens and will be easier to carry and maneuver with. However the f/4L IS would let you get shots in lower light and I would say it would be worth it for weddings etc.

I shot my first wedding this summer and between my wife and I we had 4 cameras on the go. She shot with her Nikon and a Sigma 18-200 OS. Most of her shots were meant to capture the mood and feel of the event and the people who were there. She also carried a Canon Elan II film camera with a 50mm f/1.4 on it for artistic shots and she shot black and white. I shot with an XT sporting my Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 and my 40D sporting my Sigma 24-70. The couple was very happy with the photos.

Just remember, in the end it's more about technique than gear as long as you can get the shot. For instance I had to bump my ISO to 800 at times for shots of the couple in the shade. The noise wasn't too bad but if I had left ISO at 200 I know I couldn't have gotten a stable shot. Most importantly, shoot, shoot, shoot - learn your gear and it's weak spots and know what you are capable of and the getting the right gear will follow to fill in the gaps. That's my long-winded $0.02