which lenses for photojournalism?

Hi, I'm a starting photojournalist, I've been using canon g5, now it's time for a SLR. I'm going to buy a new 20D or a used 1D (more likely 1D will be my camera). But I still haven't decided wchich lenses to buy. I need one wide angle, and one tele. They have to be bright (f<3.0) and fast, so I was looking on L lenses on B&H and I've found two.
24mm f1.4
135mm f2.0
both of them together cost less than 2000$ - that's the price range I'm looking for, but my question is - Is it a good idea to buy two prime lenses, or should I change one of them for a zoom? If yes, which one? 17-40L is too dark (f4.0), 16-35L too expensive. Please help me
Peter

I think I would start with the 24-70mm f2.8 L and grow from there. It is an extremely versatile lens.

Getting the kit lens is almost a no-cost option, so I would get that with the camera. That will let you get a little more wide angle than the 24-70, and would suffice until you can pop for more L glass.

Given your stated need for a fast lens at a reasonable price I would recomend the Tamron 28-75 http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …ghType=category​Navigation
It is a fine lens and has received great reviews on this site. It is my wife's most used lens. That should leave you with enough money to get the fantastic EF 70-200 f/2.8 L http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …ghType=category​Navigation and with a little push on the budget you could even get the IS version http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …ghType=category​Navigation

Why do they have to be so fast? And with such a limited focal length and switching lag, One would think you will miss the shot. My suggestion is to get Canon's Photojournalism L lens.

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …SA&addedTroughT​ype=search

Manas:
Starting PJ? what does that mean? The question is what will you be covering. PJ work needs good exposure, good focus, exceptional expertise with fill flash, excpetional camera handling. Who uses f/2.8 with flash anyway?
Ultimate artistic image quality, and especially creative defocus with low f/stops are not used much for grab and go PJ work. The Id bodies WILL focus at greater than f/2.8 even in low light. For EVENT work in CHANGING SITUATIONS you need zooms. They are too convenient for PJ work not to use. The primes are great, but you CAN"T zoom with your feet and will lose coverage shots putzing around.
PJ rarely NEEDS f/2.8, except for covering sports in lower light to get the shutter speed up. Most of the time you need greater than 2.8 to assure focus. The art is in the story of the picture, not the picture itself

If you are just starting, and buying this gear yourself, here is an alternate recommendation:
1. Buy the unheralded Canon 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 USED with a hood on FM forum or eBay for about $210 and use it well til you get paid enough to buy the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 or 16-35 f/2.8 L. Who gives a hoot if its got a bit of distortion at 24mm? I have always found 28mm not wide enough on the short end and 75 not long enough on the long end for work in changing situations.
2. Buy a used Canon 550 EX flash with the savings. You'll use it EVERY day, indoors and out.
3. Buy a good 70-200 f/2.8 lens. This is the money shot lens for distance.

Surprisingly, if you buy the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS, which is THE ultimate PJ moneymaker, and the other two items above USED, the cost is just about $2,000. You'll be finished on the long end. The short end you'll decide later.

Examples: Here are two PJ documentary type sequences I did with the cheap 24-85 for its compactness (even though I also own the 24-70):

http://aesop.rutgers.e​du …oTill%20Bobola/​index.html
The first image is a typical PJ fill flash. The 4th is close in same lens.

Here's another PJ fil flash:
http://aesop.rutgers.e​du …r%20Sweet%20Cor​n%208.html

And here's a money shot from last week with the Canon 70-200 IS:
http://aesop.rutgers.e​du …C%20at%20T-Town%2001.html

Ooh, my favorite topic. Photo journalism.

Here's where you start(when using Canon):
70-200mm f/2.8L IS
16-35mm f/2.8L
24-70mm f/2.8L

Those are the 3 you need. Everything else is just extra.

It's really a toss up between the 70-200 and 16-35. Those are the first two, then the 24-70 comes next. Especially if you are on a budget, get the 70-200 and 16-35 first.

I'd say you probably use the 16-35 50% of the time, while you use the 70-200 35% of the time and the 24-70 15% of the time.

And then you do need some speedlites to add to those lens and have two bodies, eventually. Lighting is important for assignments, so having a few speedlites or portable strobes is very important.

As for your body, if you need speed more than resolution so the 1D or 1D MkII is your friend. And you should eventually have two of these.

Hm, don't have much experience in this subject, but I've tried shooting candids of people in some places and found that anything 70mm and over was somewhat useless.

So, I would suggest the 35mm f/1.4L, 50mm f/1.4, and 85mm f/1.8 lenses. All sharp, all incredibly fast, all for under $2,000. How's that sound?

If you don't like swapping lenses and need slightly wider than 35mm... just pick up a 24-70mm f/2.8. Fast enough, sharp, not toooooo big and cheaper than buying all three.

I say the 28-300L too. YOu cant be changing lenses in the field and missing shots. PJs dont need the image quality the other types need. Heck the resolution of photos in newsprint is gastly.

The 28-300L with all its compromises due to extreme range would serve you well. not cheap as the tamron 28-300 (which you might consider as it is MUCH lighter and smaller) I once owned and liked, but would stand up with the rigors of this type of work better.

That's why photo journalists(or even the sports shooters) have two bodies. That's almost a requirement.

One body has the 70-200 f/2.8L and the other has the 16-35f/2.8L wide angle. And for other situations it would be the 24-70 and the 16-35.

They do need the 2.8 though. You need to be able to work in any condition and that 28-300 is not something they'd be using. Not many, if any.

thank you guys, this really helped.

grego, I know that would be a dream kit, but I can afford only one of these 3 lenses right now. what do you think about buying used lenses, it's not easy to check condition.
J Rabin, really apriciate. Answering some questions - I'm starting PJ, meaning starting for real, meaning buying digital slr. I've been working with my G5 for two years, sometimes using my bodies 10Ds with their lenses, so I know more less what's going on. but for me to buy my own eqiupment and spend few tousend $ is a big deal, so I want to make sure I buy the right ones. this is a local newspaper in a big city (Gdansk/Poland) so we shoot everything from a theatre to basketball. it's sometimes dark, there's a lot of movement, thet's why the camera and the lens have to be fast and bright.
but you are right guys, I probably don't need a quality of a prime, but zoom will be helpfull.
wish me luck

Well, if you were to pick one, I might learn towards the 16-35 for now. Since the wide angle is a very common lens since you usually have to get up in there for your assignments. Or the 70-200. Depends which way you decide to go. But either of those two are a good first start. Right now, I only have the 70-200. And next would be the 16-35.

I picked based on what I needed. I was lucky that my paper got the 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye. So i was able to use that as my 2.8 wide angle, which was neat. So I got off lucky for my college newspaper.

However, if I join UCLA's paper, since they use Nikon, I'm going to have to move up to the 16-35 if I want my wide angle. It's tough with the high costs, but once you have it, you know you got dependable equipment.

Buying used is good, if you know who you are buying from. Even on Ebay, you can get good deals if you can find a seller with good feedback. I got my 10D off ebay when the 20D first came out. He had a good rating, and it showed, because the body looked absolutely new, but came with extra stuff like the vertical grip.

The only prime i'd suggest is 50 1.4 for basketball games. It's good to use on the baseline, but the other 3 are more important for now.

yeah two bodies because they dont have a lens like a decient 28-300mm

Yeah, because a decent lens like the 16-35 2.8L, 24-70 2.8L, and 70-200f/2.8L just don't cut it.........

You know I need to add more of these and some of these to my posts.

Dante King wrote:
You know I need to add more of these and some of these to my posts.

Well after estimating how much you have spent, maybe you should stick with just one lens.