Wide-angle to telephoto or Standard lens!?

08/02/2005 12:41:25 PM · #1

Couple of days ago I've ordered a Tamron 28-75 2.8, and the store told me it would take something like 10 days for it to be delivered. I was called today, by the store, and they said it'd be something like a month now, so I gave up on that order! Got refunded.
Well, after some more "research", I'm totally in doubt now:
What if I get, instead of the Tamron, 2 standard fixed lens (50mm 1.8 and the 85mm 1.8). Quality wise, the standard ones are much better than the zoom one, but it's not as practical!
Now I'm totally lost!
Any1 care to help me out?

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

08/02/2005 12:52:05 PM · #2

it 100% depends on if you want the best image quality possible, or convenience

me ... i love primes :)

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

08/02/2005 12:54:47 PM · #3

also ... i'd go with the 85 and something wider (24,28, or 35) if you only plan to get 2

Zed Pobre

Canon EOS-20D

08/02/2005 01:15:51 PM · #4

A few notes:

As some have noted, quality will be much better on the primes. Go over your existing shots to find out what focal lengths you actually use, and see if you would have been able to move around well enough to get the same shot with a given length of prime.

The second thing to remember is that if you can't move (because you're tripod-mounted at a packed event, for instance, you only have two options: use the longest prime that covers the widest area you could possibly want to shoot and then crop out large chunks of the majority of your shots, or bring a zoom. I shot a belly dance two weeks ago, pinned up against a doorway, using the 17-85 IS. I discovered that I was shooting mostly between 20 and 35, sometimes going all the way to 17 and wanting a little more. A prime would have been completely hopeless, and what I really wanted was a 16-35 at f/2.8 so I could dump the flash.

The next feature up was a fiddler, with all my shots landing between 45 and 60mm. If I'd had a 50mm prime, I could have gotten away with that quite easily with a little cropping (the 45 shot was a bit wide anyway), and it probably would have been a better choice. Sadly, my only prime is the 85mm f/1.8.

As a final recommendation, think about how you shoot. Note the times you wanted to shoot something, but couldn't because you didn't have the right lens. Note the focal lengths that you most commonly use on the lenses that you have. Think about the number of lenses you want to carry to any event, and how fast you'll be able to dig out the one you want and change. It's really hard to give absolute advice on what type of lens collection to have, because they all work a little differently.

A collection of 10-22, 24-70, 85, and 100-400 seems like it should catch most situations, but would have broken down shooting the belly dancing. A paired 17-85 f/4.0-5.6 IS and 75-300 f/4.0-5.6 IS covers all the focal lengths very well and lets you handhold about as well as much faster (and heavier) lenses, but then you have problems with flare and chromatic aberration on the 17-85, softness on the 75-300, and issues with depth of field and shutter speed for action shots. A 10-22, 35, 50, 85, and 400 gives you spectacular quality on every shot and allows you to shoot everything from wide landscapes to wildlife... if you can always choose your exact shooting position for every shot, which isn't always possible.

Unless you're fabulously wealthy, you're going to have to prioritize what situations mean the most to you, and since none of us know exactly how and what you shoot, the best anyone here can do is tell you what a particular combination will be good at and bad at. You have to figure out what that means to your style.

08/02/2005 01:18:01 PM · #5

The kit lens will be a keeper (won't get rid of 'em), so I'll be just fine when wide angle photograhy is necessary!
Just to add to the confusion, the prime lens will cover basically the same range as the 28-75, with an aditional 10mm, but far superior quality. It just won't zoom in.
Oh god....

08/02/2005 01:26:17 PM · #6

Zed, man, that was "WoW"!
I'm mostly going to be shooting portraits for some income in the beginning. And I'm also keeping the kit lens, which basically covers my needs for wide angle shots (not the best lens in the world, but it can work some wonderfull shots).

If money wasn't an issue LoL.......

Zed Pobre

Canon EOS-20D

08/02/2005 02:40:14 PM · #7

Originally posted by scuds:

I'm mostly going to be shooting portraits for some income in the beginning. And I'm also keeping the kit lens, which basically covers my needs for wide angle shots (not the best lens in the world, but it can work some wonderfull shots).

If you're doing almost entirely studio type portraits, primes are perfect. Posed studio shots give you maximum control over position. I've found that I take 95% of my posed portrait and half-length shots with the 85mm f/1.8 now, but I like to stand back a ways. If you are space-limited, the 50mm or even the 35mm can be better, except that the 35mm is going to force you to stand very close to your models, which may make them uncomfortable.

If you're doing outdoor modeling work, it becomes a bit more iffy. Last Saturday I took a lot of pictures of a model under various waterfalls, and while I did get a lot of use out of the 85mm, I pulled out the 17-85 quite a bit when I kept running out of room to back up or wanted full length shots, and a lot of shots were taken with the 75-300, simply because she was too far away and moving back and forth a bit.

I haven't finished reviewing those shots yet. From what I've looked at so far, it looks like the ideal lens collection (in terms of quality) for that trip would have been a 16-35mm zoom for landscape, a 50mm prime and an 85mm prime to cover the majority of the portrait shooting (almost all of the shots that weren't at 85 were very close to 50), the 80-400 Sigma to cover the ranged work, and a 100mm macro prime, because I also caught some bonus shots of spiders on the way in and out. Five lenses, including one very heavy one, plus tripod, on a four hour hike plus shooting time on a hot day. Ouch. As soon as you start looking at the fact that you have to carry them all, then suddenly carrying just a 24-70, the 85mm prime, and the 70-300 DO IS starts looking like a good idea, and to hell with the wide-angle shots and spiders.

Like I said, it's all about how you shoot. The most high quality (and expensive) lens collection may be inappropriate just because it's too heavy to carry.

08/02/2005 05:03:46 PM · #8

I appreciate all of your comments Zed.
I think I'll be doing good with any of the combos. I just want to have a good combination, biggest bang for the bucks. According to what I've been reading, I'll be doing good with any ot them! The 50mm is a MUST, and I'll definatelly be getting that one. The puzzling part is about the price of the 85mm and the 28-75, they are basically the same (the 85mm in brazilian currency is R$ 66,00 cheaper than the tamron, soemthing like USD 25).
That's what's bugging me....I'll spend the same amount of money, regardless of the set I choose! I was stuck with no money for some time, and now that I do have some to spend, I can't choose what to buy, LoL.

Zed Pobre

Canon EOS-20D