| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/18/2006 03:43:02 PM · #1 |
does anyone have any suggestions? I was thinking 24-70
mostly weddings and portraits |
|
|
|
03/18/2006 03:59:17 PM · #2 |
|
|
|
03/18/2006 04:00:30 PM · #3 |
Unless you plan on sitting on top of the bride during the ceremony, you might get the 70-200/2.8L also.
Message edited by author 2006-03-18 16:02:22. |
|
|
|
03/18/2006 04:01:18 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Unless you plan on sitting in top of the bride during the ceremony, you might get the 70-200/2.8L also. |
mhm |
|
|
|
03/18/2006 04:17:12 PM · #5 |
24-70 for the closeups and groupshots, the 70-200 f2.8 for the ceremony, and the 85mm f1.2 for low light reception, if it's outside at night, or the 50mm f1.4 if $2099 is to much for one lens ;)
and a second body to be safe.. I really hate missing a special moment because I'm switching lenses....
|
|
|
|
03/18/2006 04:20:21 PM · #6 |
The 1Ds is a full frame camera as I'm sure you already know. You want to go at least with the 70-200 (if you want a zoom).
I also shoot full frame and the 70-200 is being used more than ever for 'normal' applications such as portraits.
The 24-70 will be exactly like using 15-44 on 'regular' DSLRs. This is much too wide for weddings and portraits. It is nice however as a walk-around lens.
::are
Message edited by author 2006-03-18 16:24:47. |
|
|
|
03/18/2006 04:28:29 PM · #7 |
| I agree the 70-200mm L series F2.8 IS is one heck of a great lens, especially for those candid wedding ops that you can't seem to get close enough with the 24-70. At 180mm I love its portrait ability!! |
|
|
|
03/18/2006 04:58:28 PM · #8 |
Are you upgrading from another camera? If you have 2 cameras, using 2 bodies is a big advantage. Keep one size lens on one, the 24-70mmL, and maybe a 70-200mm 2.8 on the other. That way, you can switch back and forth without having to change lenses.
I do recommend picking up the 50mm 1.8 just in case the reception or ceremony are very dark.
|
|
|
|
03/18/2006 05:02:16 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Are_62:
The 1Ds is a full frame camera as I'm sure you already know. You want to go at least with the 70-200 (if you want a zoom).
I also shoot full frame and the 70-200 is being used more than ever for 'normal' applications such as portraits.
The 24-70 will be exactly like using 15-44 on 'regular' DSLRs. This is much too wide for weddings and portraits. It is nice however as a walk-around lens.
::are |
I'm confused...LOL I thought the 24-70 was just that on a FF dSLR? (And 38-112mm on a 1.6 crop)
|
|
|
|
03/18/2006 05:51:19 PM · #10 |
I have been shooting D100 for a couple of years with 80-200 2.8 until the lense was stolen (bast***Ds)I LOVED that lense
This canon I just purchased, so I wanted to get the lense sizes for canon and the most commonly suggested.
I think 24-70 2.8 is perfect. plus I'll get a 80-200 canon equivelent.
thanks all!! |
|
|
|
03/18/2006 05:55:11 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by JRalston:
I'm confused...LOL I thought the 24-70 was just that on a FF dSLR? (And 38-112mm on a 1.6 crop) |
D'oh.. ;) You're absolutely right - it is... but this is the only way someone that are only used to a 1.6 crop camera can picture what the same lenses will look like on a FF camera.
But confusing? Yep - it sure is! LOL |
|
|
|
03/19/2006 09:36:16 AM · #12 |
Here's another idea.
Grab a 350XT/used 20D plus a 50mm f/1.4 for your second body.
That works out to 85mm at f/1.4 with the crop factor, so would be excellent for portraits.
It would work out cheaper too.
The 24-70 is fine, but if it were me, I'd stick the 70-200 (or the 80-200 if you can find it used and save a couple hundred bucks) on the 1Ds and the 50mm f/1.4 on a used 20D body and save myself some money. |
|
|
|
03/20/2006 07:28:27 PM · #13 |
I think the 24-70 is a great lens, expensive, but great lens.
The Canon version of Nikons 80-200 f2.8 would be the 70-200f2.8L lens. There is also a IS version which is similar to Nikons 70-200 VR zoom.
Both are great lenses.
If you want a cheaper normal zoom, Sigma makes a 24-70 f2.8 and Tamron makes a 28-75 f2.8 as well. Canon is bigger, more robust, and focuses quicker and quieter, but these lenses cost about $400 or less with very similar optics.
|
|
|
|
03/20/2006 07:42:15 PM · #14 |
*thinking out aloud*
If you have just purchased (IMHO) the best dSLR in the world without knowing what lens you should use with it then I think you may have jumped in at the deep end?
Jean, since money appears no (or little) worry I'd suggest the 17-40L F/4 (must be awesome ff) the 24-70L F/2.8 and the 70-200L F/2.8 IS USM, pop in a 1.4 converter with a 580 flash with a spare body (20D) and you'd have a kit to die for (or maybe kill)
Looking forward to seeing some of your work, and well done on the switch to Canon ;)
|
|
|
|
03/20/2006 11:08:30 PM · #15 |
I would think the 1Ds Mark II, would be the best dslr out there.
|
|
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: 04/16/2024 01:06:34 AM EDT.
