New Lens choices

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by mayer chalom, Dec 29, 2009.

  1. mayer chalom macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    #1
    My father got me a good deal
    A canon 7d
    50mm 1.8
    17-50 2.8 tamron
    all for about 2k

    I'm getting it tomorrow. I know it may seem that I am in a rush but I'm also looking for one or two other lenses.

    I have a budget of about 1k right now of my own money so I want to spend it wisely:). In the next month I am considering of getting one these options

    Option A medium fast telephoto and new prime
    70-200 f4l (non is)
    and another prime (looking at 28mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.4 I need some direction on good reasonably priced primes)

    Option B fast telephoto
    70-200 2.8 (non is)

    Option C new walk around lens
    24-105L is usm (not very wide on the canon 7d though with the crop factor though but great image quality).

    I'm going to see how the tamron works out (has some great reviews, the 17-55 is seemed a little overpriced and the tamron has image quality that it definitely on par with the canon) and see if I use 2.8 alot. I am shooting mostly photojournalism type subjects so the 2.8 speed would help. I shoot video predominately though, but I love stills too. (I'm so excited about the 7d I can't even sleep tonight, now I have a still and video camera).

    Any comments are appreciated. (Btw I know that the 70-200 2.8 and 24-105 are about 1200, slightly over my price range, but I could save a little longer if necessary).
     
  2. Jaro65 macrumors 68040

    Jaro65

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #2
    You're getting yourself a great camera there! Since you already have a 17-50 f2.8, 70-200 f4 may be a good telephoto addition. However, I would definitely save up a little more and get the IS version of that lens. If I recall correctly, the IS there buys you 3 f stops, which can come really handy. The 24-105 f4 is a great lens, but it gets just a bit too wide with your 1.6 crop factor (at least for my taste). If you think you may later on move to a FF camera, it may be worth considering as it would then make a great walkaround lens.
     
  3. toxic macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    #3
    if you don't know what you're looking for and are just guessing which lenses will suit you, don't buy anything for at least a month. then come back with what works and doesn't work for you.

    if you do have an idea of what you're looking for, wait because you still don't know if you're keeping the 17-50 or if you need f/2.8.
     
  4. mayer chalom thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    #4
    I'm just trying to get the most bang out of my buck. I really do think the extra stop of light would help me though on the 70-200 just it is really a steep cost. Is the 70-200 2.8 weather sealed, I heard that 70-200 f4 is not.
     
  5. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #5
    Rain covers are cheap insurance, no matter if the lens is sealed or not- it's rare types of shooting where that should ever be an issue.

    I like these folks: http://fotosharp.com/ - Try before you buy policy.

    Paul
     
  6. Robb315 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2008
    #6
    Only the IS version of the 70-200 2.8 is weather sealed.

    You could also rent the ones you think you might like before you buy them to be sure they fit your need.
    Places like, www.lensrentals.com or www.lensprotogo.com
     
  7. fiercetiger224 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    #7
    I suggest you take a look at the 135mm f2.0L for your telephoto lens. Sure it's fixed, but the image quality and bokeh is even better than the 70-200mm f2.8L. Plus, it's under $1000, and it's still my favorite lens out of all the lenses I have. I only have L lenses, so that's saying a lot. ;)

    I own both the 24-105mm f4.0L and 70-200mm f2.8L, and I have to say, I use the 135mm most, because it provides the best image quality, and if I need the background completely blurred, this lens does it the best.

    EDIT

    Wow, just checked the price on the 135mm, and it definitely went up! When I bought it a couple years back, it was only $800. It's now over $1000 new! Might want to check the used market for it, but I highly recommend this lens!

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/112539-USA/Canon_2520A004_Telephoto_EF_135mm_f_2_0L.html
     
  8. Lovesong macrumors 65816

    Lovesong

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Location:
    Stuck beween a rock and a hard place
    #8
    Option D:

    Decent tripod + head
    Flash
    Hood(s)
    Bag
    Extra card(s)
    Extra battery
    Filters (ND, Grads, CPL)
    Books

    Then, if anything is left of your budget, I'd get a 100 macro.

    While many of the items on this list are not really as fun as getting a new lens on two, in my opinion they make a huge difference in transitioning between getting good snapshots with your new toy, and really starting to understand the process of taking a photograph.
     
  9. vraxtus macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #9
    I have the 17-40 f/4 L, 24-105, 70-200 f/4 L IS and the 85 f/1.2 L II.

    The 24-105 and 85 are on my 5D 99% of the time. Even on crop, you'll pretty much have all your bases covered with these two lenses. I don't often see much need for the 70-200 unless you're shooting something extremely far away. The 24-105 bokeh is, in my opinion, just right on a crop frame body - on the 70-200 on my old XT, it basically looked like nothing but a giant colored blur in the background - no highlights, no features, even stopped down to f/8.

    Granted again you really need to establish what you want to do with your camera.

    For the $$, you really can't go wrong with most primes, except for the 28 1.8, which I hear is awful.
     
  10. mayer chalom thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    #10
    Just got 7d today!

    I have a very very old tripod but it is the most professional sturdiest tripod ever. I believe it is a star d video. I already have 16gb in cf memory cards, and I will get an adapter for the 32gb of sdhc cards (I will use the sd hc for video because for stills they are not fast enough). So I got that covered. I really need two extra batteries though. And a card reader too, but that isn't that important. When you said "in my opinion they make a huge difference in transitioning between getting good snapshots with your new toy, and really starting to understand the process of taking a photograph." I don't really understand how an extra memory card could improve your photography skills, I thought lenses and composition and manual controls do that.:)

    I went to New York today and got my 7d with my 17-50 2.8 and 50 1.8. All I got to say is damn this camera is fast. Everybody suggests get cheap dslr's like d40 (my dad has one) and man it can't even touch the 7d. I was suprised with the results from the tamron 17-50 2.8. Everybody said it was noisy and not very fast af, but it was actually really fast, faster than most usm lenses actually. Only in really really really really low light when I went to a restaurant did the it have trouble autofocusing, but by that time my battery ran out. I can't wait to really start learning the controls better, it's a bit of a learning curve, but I can easily teach myself (with the help of the manual:))

    When I got my camera today I went to staples on the way home to purchase a memory card and I got a 30mb/s 8gb cf card. Guess what it wouldn't fit in the cam. So 15min later I rushed back and exchanged it for 2 4gb cf cards without charge and they worked perfectly. At first I thought it was me because this was my first device that used cf card memory but I was doing everything right, well at least it was the card and not the 1700 dollar camera. I was shocked because I never had a defective cf card before. Have any of you had that exprience.
     
  11. firestarter macrumors 603

    firestarter

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Location:
    Green and pleasant land
    #11
    So you're planning to mainly shoot video on the 7D?

    If so, you need to realise that the onboard microphone pretty well sucks - and even if you get an external microphone it's difficult to defeat the onboard auto-gain in the audio recorder.

    If I was you, I'd get a proper microphone (like a Rode NTG-2), a hotshoe mount to put on the camera, and a Zoom H4N digital recorder to record onto.

    I'd also get some good larger CF cards - video burns space really quickly. You need probably 2 x 16G Sandisk extreme III cards.

    Also look for something to stabilise the camera if you're videoing something. A good tripod with a video head will cost you $500+. You could buy a shoulder-stock for the camera (again, this will stabilise the video) or just buy a good monopod to stop shake.
     
  12. mayer chalom thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    #12
    Thanks

    No I already have a rode video mic but thank you for your concern. I have a manfrotto with a 501hdv head right now so I'm pretty fine. The 7d doesn't really need a heavy duty video tripod it is only about 4 pounds anyway, not like my 10 pound xl1.:) The autogain isn't that big of a concern for me honestly, I tend to leave it on all my video cams except for interviews.

    I really just need some pointers on spending my money to get the most bang out of my buck.
     
  13. firestarter macrumors 603

    firestarter

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Location:
    Green and pleasant land
    #13
    Do you have the Rode video or the Rode Stereo Video?

    I've been testing the Stereo Video and the noise pretty well sucks... I think it's unusably hissy - and that's into a proper audio recorder, not the camera.

    I think you should wait 'till you get the camera and start shooting before you spend any more money. You seem to have the lenses pretty well covered - although I would have chosen the 17-40 f4L over the Tamron. Maybe you should save for the 24 f1.4.
     
  14. fiercetiger224 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    #14
    Indeed every lens has its purpose. I always use a prime about 65% of the time, since they provide the best quality. True the 85mm is best for portraits, and I use it mostly for shooting portraits indoors. I have the 85mm f1.8, as I didn't want to spend the money for the L version of the lens. It's the only non-L lens in my lineup. I don't use my 70-200mm a lot, unless I'm shooting sports. The 24-105mm I use for my general walkaround lens, and my 16-35mm I use for shooting stylized or architecture shots.

    I shoot with both a 5DII and 7D, so every one of those lenses are awesome. Just don't get a cheapo lens. Midrange and up is what you should be going for. Cheap primes are okay, but I advise against them, since they're built cheaply. And well, they're cheap for a reason.

    If you're going to be shooting video with the 7D, try to get lenses that don't overlap in focal lengths, so that you have whatever you need. Also, if you get lenses with wider apertures, the DOF gets razor thin with shooting video, so focus has to be spot on. Any lens will do the job, since the cameras are excellent in handling noise all the way up to ISO 6400.
     
  15. mayer chalom thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    #15
    The tamron is still a very good lens optically I have to say it is as good as the 17-55 is usm. It's not that bad in low light and I really don't need is. Stll it is 500 dollars, and that isn't exactly cheap, I don't get my money from trees.

    I think that tamron is one of the few 3rd party lenses that are good quality though. I was really impressed how fast the 7d focused even with sub par af lenses that I have especially in low light.

    How is the sigma 30mm 1.4 hsm?
     
  16. fiercetiger224 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    #16
    The Tamron is not bad by any means! If you get a good copy of a lens, then it'll usually do the job just as well as 1st party lenses! And yes, the 7D does great with autofocusing, even with the worst lighting conditions. I wish the 7D autofocus system was in my 5DII... ;)

    Do you really need a 30mm? If you've got a 17-55mm, I'd stick with that. I'd recommend you get a longer telephoto, since you've got the shorter focal lengths covered. 70-200mm f4L maybe?
     
  17. mayer chalom thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    #17
    This is iso 3200 with the 50mm, it seems slightly out of focus but I think that was my fault. There is basically no noise, it looks better at iso 3200 than my dad's cheapie nikon d40x at 800 or even 400!

    I think it is tied between the 70-200 f4l and the 24-105 f4l is, I do need a longer walk around lens (the 24-105) though and it is a good range for video and it is a good telephoto with the crop factor. I think I'm just gonna wait a month or two and see if I really need it, right now I'm astounded with what I have:)
     

    Attached Files:

  18. fiercetiger224 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    #18
    Hmm, it seems like you're shooting JPG correct? Not sure what settings you have your 7D with, but it looks like very aggressive noise reduction was applied to the JPG, especially if its in-camera JPG processing. It looks like it was out of focus, when it might in fact be in focus. If you shoot RAW, you can at least guarantee that no noise reduction was applied, if you turn off high-ISO noise reduction in the settings.

    I find that the 24-105mm is great for shooting video, so you might want to go for that.
     
  19. mayer chalom thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    #19
    I do find the nr agressive. I just kept it on the normal factory medium mode. I don't mind some nr so and I don't really enjoy shooting raw should I just keep it on low or use other settings.
     
  20. mayer chalom thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    #20
    Possible lens choice

    Hi guys,
    I have a canon 7d and tamron 17-50 2.8 and 50mm 1.8
    I'm into photojournalism and have a couple of options with my budget.
    I have about 1k and I after using the 17-50 I believe I need a little bit longer.

    Option A
    canon 28-105 usm (not the L lens)
    and 70-200 f4l
    and new tripod/flash/card reader/bag

    Option B
    24-105 f4l

    Option C
    28-135 is usm
    70-200 f4l
    I really like the versatility on option A. I would rather not blow all my money on one lens (option B) and I want a nice lens that won't cost me an arm and a leg if it gets damaged.
     

Share This Page