DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Lens Dilemma
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 6 of 6, (reverse)
AuthorThread
12/06/2007 12:05:07 AM · #1
So here's my situation...

This is what I've got at the moment:
Canon 40
17-55 2.8 IS
85 1.8

I'm doing one or two weddings next summer for a few friends, and, as of now, am considering really jumping into the wedding photography business. Or at least photography in general as more than just a hobby.
I know I'll be needing a little more versatility in my lens selection, so I thought I'd bounce around the ideas with you all.
My next investment will most likely be the 70-200 2.8 IS for the longer range.
HOWEVER, here's where my situation gets difficult. I'd love to invest in a WIDE angle as well, and for the 1.6 factor, the 10-22 is really the only choice here. BUT, I'm kind of afraid of purchasing yet another EF-S frame, when the possibility of upgrading in the future to full frame is possible (or at least having a full frame as a second/another body...I don't want to have two lenses I can only use with the 40D).
So here are my choices I guess:
Go for the 10-22 and just enjoy life as it is without worry about future complications.
Sell the 17-55 and continue investing in L glass...maybe pick up a 5d if the prices keep dropping?
sell the 17-55 and get a 24-70 to hold me over for a while before a) I eventually get a body that will make the 16-35 a true wide, or b) I find that I can live without a true wide for longer than I thought and not think about it.

These are thoughts that are parading around in my head. I'm not quite sure what to make of them yet, but I was wondering if anyone wanted to share their insight with a fellow friend. Thanks!
12/06/2007 01:12:55 AM · #2
A couple of thoughts. They are humble and they are mine so here goes. First and foremost great choice on the 70-200 2.8L IS. For range for low light for bokeh you are looking at a fabulous lens. It can keep you far enough from the action to stay out of the limelight while getting you close enough to seem like you were right in the middle of the action. On the other lens to buy you have a couple of options. Two that I would like to point out as options are NOT EF-S lenses and could help with that pesky buy for not or later issue. Consider the 17-40 4.0L. I know I know it is a 4 but it is a great group shot lens and of the L lenses it is very affordable. In fact you can get a new one or even check in with Joey Lawrence who is selling his. More expensive but fan-freaking-tastic is the 16-35 2.8L. Check that one out as well. On the keeping selling aspect, keep in mind you are going to want a back-up body and a lens or 3 to stick on it if you get into a jam. I wouldn't yet sell. You might want to keep your 70-200 mounted and your 17-55 on your backup body to just switch and shoot rather than unmount, mount, shoot, unmount, remount the 70 and shoot. Now all that said the 24-70 is amazing as well and probably make its way into your bag if you professionally shoot weddings, but the question currently is how to do the most with the least. And in my opinion you can do that by adding the 70-200 and either the 17-40 or the 16-35.
12/06/2007 12:08:52 PM · #3
BUMP
12/06/2007 12:55:54 PM · #4
I have a friend who shoots almost exculusively with the 17-55. He's got great stuff and rented here and there.
(you can check out his stuff here...)

I think you should probably think about that backup camera first. rent lenses (they're cheaper) and figure out which ones you use most or love best! :0)
12/06/2007 01:24:01 PM · #5
There is the artistic decision, the business decision, the technical decision and then the emotional / ego one.

You need a second/back up body if you are shooting professionally. It is extremely irresponsible and stupid not to have backup gear. That includes flash and at least a main lens. Things happen - this year I've had flash issues, battery issues, dropped a lens, bent a lens (no clue how or when), had a camera get wet and quit till it dried out (3 days later), dropped a camera (no issues other than blood pressure LOL) and had a 7 year old run up at a reception (with cake covered hands) and grab my camera by the lens! Stopping to fix something is not an option at a wedding, as the events keep moving and you are expected, and being paid, to get the photos - no matter what happens.

L glass rocks. and holds it's value. It's expensive and heavy. You can't go wrong with L glass.
However, the 17-55 is IS and that beats the 24-70 in most situations at weddings. The 70-200 2.8 IS is a must have lens for portraiture and weddings and sports and well, most everything. You'll never sell it.

How realistic is a FF body? What about shooting with 2 bodies - 70-200 on a 5D and 17-55 on a 40D? the 85 is great a 5D just as the 10-22 is on a 40D. (the 10-22 ROCKS btw).

Business wise...the 40D, 17-55, 10-22 vs 5D 16-35, 24-70...there is a huge cost difference and not much, if any, performance difference (the IS lens may even be a better choice). You can sell the 10-22 and 17-55 if you need to. Or use them on the backup body as part of your backup plan. It's a BUSINESS decision. Say you shoot 3 weddings with the 10-22 and then get a 5D. You paid $700 and sell it for $625. Cheaper than renting it for the 3 weddings.

I went thru this same thing and concluded that a 1D mk3 is what I want, but it's $4500. For it I'll need the 24-70 or 16-35 (or both). Hmm...that's a damned expensive upgrade. My plan is to get some primes next month (50 1.2, 135 F2) and later in the year replace my tamron 28-75 (backup lens) with a 24-70 canon, THEN get the 1D3. My 40D is 3 months old and can work for another year with no problem.

It's a better artistic (lenses first, bodies second) and business (financial) choice for me.
12/06/2007 01:48:55 PM · #6
All this advice has been great!
The more I indulge myself in learning about the different lens/body combinations (and you could spend years reading everyone's opinions about them all and it would all even out in the end i think...), I think it will definitely be a business (financial) and and artistic choice first...at least for this next year.

It's hard not to ignore all the praise the 40D and 17-55 have gotten...and even the 10-22. I think I may have been trying to convince myself that I "needed" for some reason a full frame in the near future. Sure, It may happen eventually, but I think I should be satisfied with the setup I've got, continue to build on that, and work on mastering my skills with them rather than following the changes of the wind all the time.

If anyone else has any advice, I'd love to hear it! Thanks for those who've responded. I really appreciate it!
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/03/2024 06:20:51 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/03/2024 06:20:51 PM EST.