Messages

1

Lenses / Re: 135L vs 70-200 IS MK II - real world opinions and experience needed

« on: November 28, 2012, 06:01:34 PM »

Don't let yourself disturb by other comments, you made the RIGHT choice. Forget about the 70-200mm f4, it's a nice lens, agreed, but it's for hobbyists and travellers. If you want to go pro, you need the f2.8 IS, period. You can afford smaller apertures on shorter lenses, or if you work on a tripod. Handheld you need 2.8 minimum on long lenses. Why do you think fashion pros go for the 200mm f2, or 300mm f2.8 ? They don't spend hard earned cash for the glory of it, it's because they NEED that extra stop for faster apertures and better background blur. In many occasions this extra stop will save your day, that's what you pay for, not for extra sharpness, contrast or whatever else. IS is helpful, but does not replace the right speed, nor the proper camera handling technique.

IMO it would make more sense to have the 50mm 1.4 and the 70-200mm 2.8 the the 50mm 1.2 and the 70-200 f4. My guess is, if you change your 70-200mm f2.8 for the f4 you will quickly regret it on one of your future assignments.

One side plus of the big lens, however stupid it might sound, is that your clients will be more impressed, since for most people pro equipment = pro photographer. People's mind is set in a way that if you show poorly dressed, come with a cheap used car, etc., you are not successful in your business, so you are not the one they should give their money to. I hate the rule, but it's how it works in a lot of businesses. So consider your new lens as an excellent business investment as well.

Synmar... you make a lot of great points!  I really appreciate your feedback!  Im lock onto solidly with my 2.8 IS II.  As ive been shooting mainly portraits with it the last couple days I really like the versatility of it and the quality of the images.  Shot some natural light portraits indoor and outdoor as well as dusk portrait shots and I couldnt be more happier.. 

The 135 may be great also but im quite happy with the 70-200mm.. no regrets keeping it..money well spent. 

2

Lenses / With my 5D MK III is an f/2.8 lens really needed???

« on: November 27, 2012, 04:30:41 PM »

Hi All,

I've been mulling over this since I bought the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II this past weekend. Not sure if its buyers remorse or rookie mistake in not realizing the capabilities of my new 5d MK III.

I currently use a 5d MK III and while using my 24-105L f/4 i noticed that  I can easily shoot dimly lit indoor scene (church wedding, night indoor events, etc.) just by bumping up the ISO to 8000-10000 and the images look very good still!  I have not notice any drastic increases in noise and even so I can get it out using software.  Now I have not tried printing these shots yet BUT even in 100% crop the images looks good.

Is there any merit to this line of thinking that f/4 lenses are good enough to use for dimly lit scnese using the 5d MK III?  Should i exchange the 70-200mm 2.8 IS II with the 70-200 f/4 IS and save the $900 difference and apply that to a 16-35 MK II or the 35 L?  Your opinions/experience would be great on this!  thanks in advance!

3

Lenses / Re: 135L vs 70-200 IS MK II - real world opinions and experience needed

« on: November 27, 2012, 04:19:35 PM »

Thanks for the response Neuro.. i actually was just beginning to think that!  With the 5d MK III i could've just bought the 70-200 f/4 L IS and just push the ISO higher for indoor scenes (church wedding, receptions, general indoor scenes, etc)..AND save almost $900!

Im starting to rethink this decision of mine in buying the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II ?!??    grrrrr...  Anyone else out there think that returning the 70-200 2.8 IS II and getting the70-200mm  f/4 IS is a better idea since im using the 5D MK III??

4

Lenses / Re: 135L vs 70-200 IS MK II - real world opinions and experience needed

« on: November 27, 2012, 10:10:34 AM »

All,

thank you greatly for all your feedback and opinions!  I certainly learned quite a bit..

With the versatility I needed for future shoots I decided to get the 70-200mm 2.8 IS II for now.  Went to L.A. for a shoot and stopped by Samy's.  Luckily, they had a great No Tax sale over the weekend which pretty much sealed my decision and was able to negotiate a better deal on top.

Again thanks for all the feedback!  I do hope to get the 135L some day but i believe my next purchase will have to be the 16-35L  to be properly kitted for future wedding shoot opportunities. 

Also, i'm thinking that i may still need the 24-70 FL range but i mostly shoot with my 50L most times and I have the 24-105 as well if i really needed that range.  Ive also noticed that using my 5d MK III I am able to bump up my ISO quite a bit and still have some keepers using the 24-105L.  I shot some indoor dimly lit shots with 8000 - 10000 ISO and was greatly surprised by the results using the 24-105L.  Perhaps I may not need the 24-70L using the 5D MK III body?  Anybody else had this experience?

5

Lenses / Re: Have $2200 budget which lens(es) to get next?

« on: November 26, 2012, 12:50:54 AM »

All,

thank you so much for sharing your opinions!  Truly appreciated it..

I DID end up buying the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II this weekend when I went to L.A. for a shoot.  I came across an Ad by Samy's and they had an awesome NO TAX sale the whole weekend.  Additionally, I negotiated a better price on top of it! got it for well under my $2200 budget which gave me more than enough left for a new Lowepro 180 AW Messenger bag ! :-)

Bottomline, I love this lens and the images from it are stellar!  Again thanks for all the recommendations!

6

Lenses / Have $2200 budget which lens(es) to get next?

« on: November 22, 2012, 03:54:55 AM »

Hi All,

Well i've been thinking about this dilemma for a few days and have narrowed it to 3 choices.  Which one would you choose below?

1. Buy the 70-200mm IS MK II  for about $2099 new

2. Buy the 135L used at about $800 in craigslist + a 70-200mm 2.8 non-IS $1299 new

3. Buy the 135L used at about $800 in craigslist + a 70-200mm f/4 IS $1099 new

4. Any other suggestions based on my use below?

Im new to paid photography though been a hobbyist for years.  Recently upgraded to 5D MK III which makes me think that i dont need the 2.8 with IS since i can always bump up the ISO to compensate and i don't do sports photography..  Also interested with the 135L since i have never seen a bad review on it.    I am and will be shooting 80% indoor/outdoor portraits for babies, engagement shoots and fitness models.  I do predict that about 20-30% of my business will be weddings in 2013.  As of now only have 1 wedding book and another on the way for 2013 so mostly portraits/engagement shoots at the moment.

anyways let me know what you think..

Current equipment: 5D MK III, 24-105 f/4 L, 50mm f/1.2 L, 28-75mm f/2.8 Tamron

7

Lenses / 135L vs 70-200 IS MK II - real world opinions and experience needed

« on: November 19, 2012, 03:20:18 PM »

Hi All,

I recently upgraded to a 5D MK III which I will be using for more portrait and engagement sessions work.  I deliberated between the 35L vs the 50L and decided to go with the 50L based on opinions i read here and the IQ and AF when paired with the 5D MK III.

Now I am in need of your expertise and experience on which lens to get next.  As mentioned I am just getting into "paid" portrait shoots (fitness model shoots/headshots and some family and baby shoots) and just booked my first 2 engagement shoots for Jan and Feb and wondering which will be best to use.  I also have the opportunity to shoot 2 weddings in summer 2013 as well which will be my first experience shooting weddings.  1 as a second shooter and 1 as primary.  Im giving the relevant information in order to determine which lens will be good to get in terms of IQ, versatility, etc.  At this point in time i cant afford both having just invested in the 5D MK III and the 50L.  My initial budget getting into this semi pro photography was $5000 and will unfortunately have to exceed it.

So is the 135L better for my current/future needs or will the 70-200mm IS MK II a better choice since it will give me the FL versatility that i may need for future shoots?  Im looking for realworld experience of owners of these lens as I was initially leaning to the 135L and started to think in terms of versatility and started to doubt my decisions. 

Your opinions will be greatly appreciated!  thanks in advance!


BTW just to disclose my only 2 other lenses im using now, I currently have a 24-105L and a 28-75 Tamron 2.8 (i Know not very good lens but cant afford the Canon version at this point.  LOL..)  On my short list after getting one of the lens above (135L or 70-200 2.8L) is I definitely want to get the 16-35 L MK II for the wide group shots during the wedding etc. unless you guys can recommend a better lens maybe a 24L? Not sure here yet.

8

EOS Bodies - For Stills / 5D Mark III - is this a good price?

« on: November 15, 2012, 03:16:22 PM »

Hi All,

I have an opportunity to buy a Brand New Canon 5D Mark III from a canon Authorized Dealer for $2898.  Is this a good price considering its listed everywhere for $3299 right now? $401 discount

or do you guys believe it will go lower than that during the thanksgiving or holiday sales?

Any advice/insight would be greatly appreciated.  This is my first full frame camera and excited to pull the trigger.

thanks

9

Lenses / New Canon 5D Mark III - good price?

« on: November 15, 2012, 02:00:14 PM »

Hi All,

I have an opportunity to buy a Brand New Canon 5D Mark III from a canon Authorized Dealer for $2898.  Is this a good price considering its listed everywhere for $3299 right now? $401 discount

or do you guys believe it will go lower than that during the thanksgiving or holiday sales?

Any advice/insight would be greatly appreciated.  This is my first full frame camera and excited to pull the trigger.

thanks