Gear Talk > Lenses

Help me choose a lens

(1/5) > >>

Hi all,
I could use some advice on choosing my next lens, please.
Although I don't have any expensive gear, a few friends of mine (P&S owners) keep asking me to shoot family events, like their kids' birthday parties (one-eyed man in the land of the blind...). The thing is, I fell (well, I am) very limited with my current gear and avoid the events whenever possible.
The "problem":
- 60D
- 18-135 kit lens
- 50 1.4 lens
- Speedlite 430 EX II
- Manfrotto MKC3-P01 tripod
(Yeah, I know, cheap stuff, but I was not sure when I first started and decided to keep it relatively cheap.)
Since I'm enjoying photography much more than I could anticipate when I bought the camera, I think I could make good use of some better gear now. (And maybe the hobby will turn into a part-time job, who knows?) I'm just not sure if I should keep buying EF-S lenses because I will someday, maybe in 1 or 2 yrs from now, upgrade to FF.
Well, anyway:
- FF now, like a 6D with the 24-105 kit and saving for faster lenses in the future, or
- Save for a while and then go FF (body-only) with a 24-70 2.8 for better motion-stopping possibilities, or
- Canon 10-22 + 24-70 2.8, and keep the 60D for now, or
- Keep the 60D, buy a 17-40 instead of the 10-22, and make do with the 17-40, 50 1.4 (and zooming with my feet) and the kit lens until I decide to take the plunge and go FF?
I'm aware the 10-22 is not a fast lens; does this make it a not-so-good lens for group pics at parties?
Main use would be parties and other events, family (wife!) portraits, and of course taking a bunch of pics of my own kid.
(Please have in mind that I live in Brazil, and it will not be so easy to buy/sell used gear down here as it is in the USA when I go FF; not sure how it works in Europe.)
Thanks in advance!

Random Orbits:
I would suggest going FF (6D + 24-105) now rather than later.  The 60D does not have AFMA and you may be at a disadvantage when using fast primes (even your 50 f/1.4).  The 24-105 f/4 and 50 f/1.4 will cover most of your needs.  If you want a fast wide prime (i.e. 35 or 85) later, then it can be added then.  24mm should be wide enough for group portraits.  Any wider, and WA distortion becomes more pronounced for objects near the corners/edges, which is not good for people pics anyway.  The 17-40 is more of a landscape lens, and not for people.

If you plan to go FF at some point, I'd consider a 100mm  prime, there are a few to choose from depending on budget.  Then you can use your 50mm when you don't have a lot of space and the 100 when you do.  Plus both are useable on FF.  I have a bunch of primes, and find them mostsly inconvenient when I'm shooting something big like a building or landscape and I can't zoom out or in.  For people, I think primes are just as easy to use as a zoom.  Plus they keep you from sitting in one place and with a prime you will end up snapping photos as you will keep moving around.  I have found that the longer focal length, which will move you further away from your subject, allows for more "natural" looking spontaneous photos.  Plus you can get some really fast primes for much less money than one of the faster zoom lenses. 

Of course if money is no object, then the 24-70 f2.8 is probably the way to go, but since this isn't something you make a living at, I'm assuming your budget isn't unlimited, and then the prime will be a more affordable way to go, still be usefull with a FF, and without sacrificing IQ. 

If you really want a zoom, and you don't go FF, I think the 18-55 f2.8 is kind of the consensus lens for a cropped sensor.

Also, I'd take your friends up on every offer you get.  Snap hudreds of photos, you will get some keepers, and you will get better every time you do it. 

A 5D classic would make much better use of your 50mm. They're cheap as chips any way.

Firstly if you are going in for a FF sometime soon, don't buy any more EF-S lenses.

If you can afford it, go in for a 6D and 24-105. It is a good lens.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version