Lens suggestion for a 1600 budget

I

imberandon

Guest
My question is about lens. Im currently a Journalism and I am wanting to upgrade from my kit lens.

I shoot with a Canon 60d, a 18-55IS 3.5-5.6, 75-300 4.5-5.6 and a 50 1.8, all canon lens i do not own a flash or a good tripod. After buying the 50mm I could never go back to the kit lens because they are not nearly as sharp . I was wondering if anyone can help me pick out some lens that i can benefit and expand my photography skills on.

My want is to get every L lens out there but my budget will not let me aha, i have a budget of 1600, i would love to get the 24-105 L and 70-200 2.8. Does anyone have any suggestion on what i should do or any other lens that i can get to add more bang to my buck.

Thanks for the help
 
May 12, 2011
1,386
1
imberandon said:
My question is about lens. Im currently a Journalism and I am wanting to upgrade from my kit lens.

I shoot with a Canon 60d, a 18-55IS 3.5-5.6, 75-300 4.5-5.6 and a 50 1.8, all canon lens i do not own a flash or a good tripod. After buying the 50mm I could never go back to the kit lens because they are not nearly as sharp . I was wondering if anyone can help me pick out some lens that i can benefit and expand my photography skills on.

My want is to get every L lens out there but my budget will not let me aha, i have a budget of 1600, i would love to get the 24-105 L and 70-200 2.8. Does anyone have any suggestion on what i should do or any other lens that i can get to add more bang to my buck.

Thanks for the help

Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS, it's very versatile on a crop body, great walk around lens, and one of the sharpest zooms I've ever used (at least as sharp as the 24-70 or 24-105). You can find them from $875-$950 used. Plus you'd have some extra leftover to buy some other accessories.
 
Upvote 0
Mar 25, 2011
16,848
1,835
Your 75-300mm lens should probably be upgraded, almost any lens will be better. but, if your 18-55mm IS is not sharp, something is wrong. Is is cheaply made, but it is a sharp lens.

I'd test any new lenses before buying them, or be sure you can return them. The 60D does not have microfocus adjust, and if the body is off, any lens could look bad.

I have a 15-85mm EF-s for general use, and its great. It was a Canon Refurb, just like new. If you like telephoto, add a 70-200mm f/4 IS to the 15-85

Refurb 15-85mm refurb - $640 http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_269486_-1

Refurb 70-200mm f/4L IS $1080

If you signup for the Canon online store newsletter and be patient, they have a 15% off sale several times a year, I expect one again in the next few weeks. You will get a advance purchase code a day before the sale goes on for everyone.
 
Upvote 0
D

digicV

Guest
Dude, let me share my experience with you. Almost a decade in journalism, another in fashion, another freelance. Done all Canon and Nikkor zooms. Now I have come back full circle to primes. For too many reasons. I can tell looking at my images just which ones were from zooms and which from primes (well mostly). In most cases a few steps back or forward compensate for a zoom. Not true for sports/action etc though. Yet another reason - primes are so much fun. After lugging a 24-70L for a while, a 35mm or a 50mm just makes it so enjoyable. And sharper. Plus you laugh all the way to the bank with your savings.
Remember, this just my experience in my work environment. If you have to ask what you should buy then you are missing the point - go out and learn more and make your own decision. Why would anyone want do anything based on someone else's opinion?
 
Upvote 0
I agree with Axilrod, get a EF-s 17-55 2.8 IS, this lens can make a crop sensor camera sing. Not only is it a great walk around lens, its also a very good indoor lens. Some of the older versions of this lens have issues with dust getting inside the lens, just a warning if you buy one used.

I would also get a 580 or 430 flash, I hate the pop-up flash, but maybe thats just me.
 
Upvote 0
imberandon said:
My question is about lens. Im currently a Journalism and I am wanting to upgrade from my kit lens.

I shoot with a Canon 60d, a 18-55IS 3.5-5.6, 75-300 4.5-5.6 and a 50 1.8, all canon lens i do not own a flash or a good tripod. After buying the 50mm I could never go back to the kit lens because they are not nearly as sharp . I was wondering if anyone can help me pick out some lens that i can benefit and expand my photography skills on.

My want is to get every L lens out there but my budget will not let me aha, i have a budget of 1600, i would love to get the 24-105 L and 70-200 2.8. Does anyone have any suggestion on what i should do or any other lens that i can get to add more bang to my buck.

Thanks for the help

EF-s 17-55 f/2.8 IS + EF 135 2.0L should be close enough to 1,600 USD.
 
Upvote 0
Caps18 said:
What type of journalism photos are you taking? What type of news are you covering? If it is at night, the 24 f/1.4, 35 f/1.4 or 50 f/1.2 would let you take really good photos or video in low light conditions.

But, if you are doing sports or paparazzi, a longer lens will be needed.

That was just my thought as I read your entry. It really depends on the type and the range of your photographic needs.

My preferred picks from my list of lenses (below) are
[list type=decimal]
[*]Ultra-range: 10-22 (+ 60 macro) + 70-200 f4.0 non-IS (IS would be my choice today!), 1.5 kg & 1300 bucks w/o 60mm macro + one or two EOS 40D bodies, first lenses are limited to crop cameras!
[*]Compact but really versatile and usable in low light conditions: 2.8/24 EF + 2.0/100EF + typically two bodies for fast lens change. Just limited in terms of macro capability. Other advantages: Very contrasty photographs, unobtrusive lenses (small, no red rings, black!)
[/list]

If you need fast access between two focal lengths at high aperture it might be a good idea to buy "cheaper" lenses primes and a secondary body - and you have a backup cam too.

Good luck for your choice!
 
Upvote 0
B

briansquibb

Guest
mb66energy said:
one or two EOS 40D bodies

I know 40D's are good but high iso isn't their forte

I am assuming by Journalism we are talking about work at a lower quality reportage level rather than National Geographic.

I think we need to know more about the job specification.

Attached is a photo I took this week on a really low budget setup - 40D+55-250. I was surprised at the IQ - I took a simillar one with the 1Ds3 + 70-200 II and it was only the colour tones that gave it away rather than sharpness.

It is just a reminder that the latest and greatest isn't needed to get everyday pictures.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1125x.jpg
    IMG_1125x.jpg
    66.6 KB · Views: 1,077
Upvote 0
I

imberandon

Guest
well right now im still starting out so im hoping to get some good lens that will help me develop my photography skills, i have shot mostly in the day because my lens are to slow for night or indoors. i do like to shoot street photography and i want to try out portraits and weddings in the future.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/myythoughts/ if you want to see some shots i have taken
 
Upvote 0
B

briansquibb

Guest
imberandon said:
well right now im still starting out so im hoping to get some good lens that will help me develop my photography skills, i have shot mostly in the day because my lens are to slow for night or indoors. i do like to shoot street photography and i want to try out portraits and weddings in the future.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/myythoughts/ if you want to see some shots i have taken

So are you planning to do paparazi type reporting, news reporting or fashion type or why?
 
Upvote 0

KurtStevens

Practice safe photography, Use a concept.
May 25, 2011
84
0
35
www.kurtstevensphotography.com
I would not settle for 18-55. Plastic cheap, 3.5-5.6, I don't believe worth the time of day to even use the lens. yes it does cover the range but would you rather have a better piece of glass? I figured out very early(as well as you) that primes are the way to go. Zoom is helpful but primes make the difference. Radical idea, sell all your glass you have (maybe not the 50 or upgrade to the 1.4) and take that money with the money you have now and set yourself up with some good primes?

Yes you won't have the versatility of going to 300mm right off the bat but in most situations you can zoom with your feet. I own two L lenses myself and I can say I almost use my 85mm 1.8 more than those lenses. My setup consists of 16-35, sig 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, and canon 135 f/2. The 85 is a top performer out of my bag followed by the 135. Since I'm shooting on a 5d i don't have quite the reach with the 135 but it beats out the 70-200 in my opinion (weight, size, cost, flashiness). I rented the 35 1.4L over the summer and was in love, covered great angles and was sharp as all get out.

The 135 I bought for 900 was a great purchase and the 35 1.4L would be my next lens. I've been debating myself to sell my 16-35 for it. I'm not quite sure what I"m going to do with it, I wanted to give my opinion on the matter. I hope you can see my point of view on it. Rent before you buy or at least get hands on. It'll put everything into perspective.
 
Upvote 0
well_dunno said:
briansquibb said:
Replace the 75-300 with a 70-300L - will be better for journalism

Brian, what is your take on 70-300 L vs 100-400 L?
37.1 oz vs 48.7 oz is really the big camera-tipper

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

To the o.p., sooner or later, a good tripod is needed, and usually you don't know it until someone strong-arms you into doing it right ;) Maybe not for some journalism, but events, definitely makes a difference.

What I ended up with:
Manfrotto 055CXPRO4, Manfrotto 468MG and converted the ball-head to an arca-swiss type . . . at the time I got the pair for $454 and there was a rebate on it.

I really don't hesitate to take it along if I even *think* I'm going to need it, since it's so light and hassle free to set up/take down.

As for lenses, if I had to own one lens on a crop body, it'd be the 15-85mm, which pretty much stays on my 60D now that I have a 5DmkII. As long as my head is on straight, I can't take a bad picture with it. The 24-105 you mentioned is also a good choice, but the extra-wideness of the '15' in tight spaces sometimes makes a difference.
 
Upvote 0
B

briansquibb

Guest
well_dunno said:
briansquibb said:
Replace the 75-300 with a 70-300L - will be better for journalism

Brian, what is your take on 70-300 L vs 100-400 L?

The 70-300L is a small lens, that works will as a portrait lens. Smaller than the 70-200
The 100-400 is a big lens with the 100 being tpp big for portraits

I sold mine and bought the 70-300L for walkabout, the 400 f/2.8 for the reach. This has worked very well for me
 
Upvote 0
If $1600 is your budget, why spend it on one lens and hope that it does everything when if think smart and budget accordingly you can get a range of lenses and a flash. My two cents is purchase a 70-200 f/4L for $600, a 28-135 for about $400 and then add a used 430 EX for about $160 through KEH, you will still have about $400 to start saving for another lens in the future. With that kit you should be in pretty good territory with spending all of your money. Remember, you can buy theses lenses through KEH who is a very reputable dealer for used equipment and not spend all your money on one lens.
 
Upvote 0
If you want to not be noticed and get great pictures, I would avoid the white L lenses. For v good reach on a crop body, value and very good IQ, I would recommend the 70-300 4-5.6 IS. The IS works great and allows use for fast moving subjects and to hand hold it when slower speeds are essential.

For indoors and limited light conditions, the 50mm 1.4 is a great value and you won't believe the wonderful images it will produce for you. You might want to invest in flash such as the 430 EX. with the extra cash. Check out eBay for that.

After that, it is all up to you....and you still save a little cash. If you sell the existing lenses, give a consideration to the excellent 17-40mm L.
 
Upvote 0
briansquibb said:
Replace the 75-300 with a 70-300L - will be better for journalism

I was going to suggest that as well. I have owned 2 copies of the 70-200 f2.8 mk.ii, and my 70-300L is sharper.

It has incredible resolution advantages compared to the 75-300. It will be like a Veil was lifted. When you see though the viewfinder with it, it just looks so much cleaner and easy on the eyes. It's weight and size are much better suited as a walk around lens. It is "L" and yes, it is a white one. ;)
 
Upvote 0