| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/17/2007 03:50:02 PM · #1 |
| Hello! I'm hoping to buy a new lens for my 5D in the near future. I currently have a Canon EF 24-105mm F/4.0 IS. It's a great lens n' all but I think I need a little bit more flexibility lens-wise. And price isn't really an issue at the moment. I'm leaning towards something telephoto, however I'm open to suggestions :D Thanks |
|
|
|
12/17/2007 04:29:14 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by logik:
Hello! I'm hoping to buy a new lens for my 5D in the near future. I currently have a Canon EF 24-105mm F/4.0 IS. It's a great lens n' all but I think I need a little bit more flexibility lens-wise. And price isn't really an issue at the moment. I'm leaning towards something telephoto, however I'm open to suggestions :D Thanks |
70-200 F2.8 L IS
|
|
|
|
12/17/2007 04:48:41 PM · #3 |
I agree with LoudDog. The 70-200 2.8L IS is my next lens and here are some reasons why.
1. Good reasonable reach and range.
2. F 2.8! It is fantastic and is the choice of many many professionals who shoot weddings, portraits, and sports. It is the low light L lens. If you aren't going with a prime this is your lens.
3. It is L glass and if you look at lens reviews. . . I suggest //www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ it will give you tons of great lens reviews and what the lens is particularly good at.
Hopefully this gives some reasons behind picking the 70-200 2.8 and since you said that cost wasn't particularly a problem I don't need to launch into the why the 2.8 instead of the 4.0 discussion.
Thanks and good luck!
Mike |
|
|
|
12/17/2007 04:55:15 PM · #4 |
Well, if money is not an issue right now why not get this little lot?
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
Sigma 300mm f/2.8 EX APO HSM for Canon
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 I
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro MF
The above hasn't improved my photography but I now look good taking an average shot ;) |
|
|
|
12/17/2007 05:55:41 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
Well, if money is not an issue right now why not get this little lot?
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
|
This won't fit a 5D
|
|
|
|
12/17/2007 06:29:25 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Originally posted by logik:
Hello! I'm hoping to buy a new lens for my 5D in the near future. I currently have a Canon EF 24-105mm F/4.0 IS. It's a great lens n' all but I think I need a little bit more flexibility lens-wise. And price isn't really an issue at the moment. I'm leaning towards something telephoto, however I'm open to suggestions :D Thanks |
70-200 F2.8 L IS |
Ditto.
I'd add a 16-35 f/2.8L II for the wide end and a 300mm or 400mm f/2.8L for the Tele end...
|
|
|
|
12/17/2007 06:39:33 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
Well, if money is not an issue right now why not get this little lot?
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
|
This won't fit a 5D |
Yes, sorry, that would be an expensive mistook (cut-n-paste erur) |
|
|
|
12/17/2007 06:49:29 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by doctornick:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Originally posted by logik:
Hello! I'm hoping to buy a new lens for my 5D in the near future. I currently have a Canon EF 24-105mm F/4.0 IS. It's a great lens n' all but I think I need a little bit more flexibility lens-wise. And price isn't really an issue at the moment. I'm leaning towards something telephoto, however I'm open to suggestions :D Thanks |
70-200 F2.8 L IS |
Ditto.
I'd add a 16-35 f/2.8L II for the wide end and a 300mm or 400mm f/2.8L for the Tele end... |
Just to add a little debate, I'm not sure the 16-35 adds a lot of value over the 17-40 f/4. Wide angle usually can afford slower shutter speeds so the 2.8 is less useful. The one caveat I'd say is if you would like to do night photography and want to capture stars with a little trailing as possible.
|
|
|
|
12/17/2007 07:38:00 PM · #9 |
70-200 is always a good option for portraits, but given that you already have the 24-105, and a full frame sensor, maybe it would be good to go longer and get the 100-400. This is supposed to be a great lens, and the 400mm will give you a nice telephoto reach on the full-frame sensor.
But, it all depends what you want to do. Wide is nice too. My next lens will hopefully be wide. |
|
|
|
12/17/2007 07:52:08 PM · #10 |
What do you shoot, or want to shoot?
The 100-400 is great for outdoors, wildlife, etc. Not great for portraits or low light.
the 70-200 2.8 IS is THE lens, but there are lesser variants that might work for you - there is a non-IS, as well as IS and no IS F4 versions that a lot lighter - important if you hike for example.
100 2.8 macro - not longer, but macro is fun too!
15 fisheye is really cool on a FF body.
Something for creamy shallow dof shots? Lots of choices in the primes range - 18 1.8, 50 1.4 or 85 1.8 are good and affordable. 14, 24 1.4, 35 1.4, 50 1.2, 85 1.2 are the L variants - not cheap, not light, but NICE.
Perhaps the 135 F2 - a magnificent lens, an L and cheap as L's go.
Want white and a stronger upperbody? The 28-300 L lens is awesome. The older no IS version (35-350) is about 1/2 the price if you can find one, and just as nice.
|
|
|
|
12/18/2007 05:27:14 PM · #11 |
Get the 50mm f/1.2L. forget all the reviews you've read about this lens. i was a bit skeptical when i read the reviews but after shooting with it i am hooked. this lens rocks! i havent taken it off my camera ever since i got it. my 24-70mm f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, and 17-40mm f/4L sits and collects dust while my 50mm collects light! i nicknamed this lens the "blackhole" because this thing is a light sucking machine!
example: room lit with two candles only, shooting at f/1.2 i can get speeds of 1/80 and still get sharp pictures. no other lens in the world can get you pictures like this. not even the 85mm f1.2 because of the longer zoom.
i started with the f/1.8 version then upgraded to the f/1.4 and was amazed by the quality difference (build and picture). just when i thought it couldn't get any better, going from the 1.4 to the 1.2 version i was blown away. the bokeh on the 1.8 is harsh. the 1.4 is better. but on the 1.2 it is buttery smooth!
borrow it, rent it, try it...you'll be hooked. |
|
|
|
12/18/2007 07:24:37 PM · #12 |
I'm a freshman in college down in Florida majoring in photography. And in this first semester we have done a little bit of everything, even some studio work.
I'm a pretty big fan of taking pictures outside in low light, around dusk and at night etc. So anything F/2.8 and lower is pretty appealing. come to think of it im really not sure anymore on which side of the spectrum I should go... wide angle or telephoto... :/
I've also got a question on whether or not IS is worthwhile when shooting with a telephoto like the 70-200mm. Is the extra money really necessary? maybe im just crazy :P
thanks for all the help :D |
|
|
|
12/18/2007 07:31:21 PM · #13 |
The question about IS being worth the dough has been asked and answered countless times. We're not supposed to point that out because its rude to you the newcomer, but it's true nontheless and you might try searching the forums a bit. I feel confident that any college freshman who can afford a 5D can weather a little frank talk. Welcome aboard!
|
|
|
|
12/18/2007 07:33:19 PM · #14 |
Cost aside, IS is definitely a nice thing to have. I have the Sigma 2.8, non IS, and even outdoors in shade, I often have to bump the ISO to get rid of shake, even at the short end of the zoom. Bumping the ISO is not going to be much issue with the 5D, but IS just means you can work in 3 stops less light before you need a tripod. That's a nice freedom.
As for whether it's worth the money, well, if you have a 5D, then I think your decision is already made as to whether you think it's worth spending more to get what you want. :)
|
|
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: 04/24/2024 09:46:24 PM EDT.
