Making a wise choice on lens purchases.

[Ozarker]

I'm in a sort of transition phase with my photography hobby and getting much more serious with it. By serious, I mean becoming more educated and working at it as a craftsman rather than just pointing, shooting, and hoping to get lucky. I work a whole lot (70+ hours a week), but things will be slowing down a whole lot for me in the next year or two. With the exception of my EF 50mm f/1.4, all my non-L lenses are going to be sold. My T5i is also going to be sold. I'll also add either the 5D mkiii or a 1Dx.

Here's what I want to do once things slow down:

1. Shoot high school and other local sporting events (As a hobby at first: providing photos free to interested players and the local small town newspaper)
2. Shoot portraits at no charge (So I can practice more and learn the art. If I've learned anything, it is absolutely a fine art that some of you have honed beautifully).
3. Photograph wildlife (especially birds).
4. Basically photograph whatever interests me, but in a slow and methodical way to develop a "style".

Over the past year I have started adding to my gear to start towards these plans for the future. I have the light modifiers I want, flash, LED continuous lighting, etc. Now I am at a fork in the road when it comes to lenses and I need to know what some of you think I should do going forward.

I lead a very simple life. Very basic. I don't buy new cars (I drive very inexpensive used cars until the wheels fall off). I live in a very basic home, and I am nearly always wearing just a pocket t-shirt, jeans, and tennis shoes. I do this so that I can afford my hobbies. Always have. I love guitars, guns, and photography. Well, I've got my guns. I have my guitars, and I still have all my own teeth. Now I want to round out my photo gear. I only tell you about my lifestyle because I would hate for somebody to assume that I'm just some guy with more money than sense. I am not. I just live in a very modest manner that allows for my hobbies... which I think are more important to me than granite countertops or a BMW. Nothing against those things (I love BMWs), but I could never have my hobbies if I had those things. Hobbies will keep me busy when I'm old.

Anyway, I need to add either the Canon EF 200mm f/2 IS USM, or the Canon EF 600mm f/4 IS ii USM in the next year or so. Maybe as soon as 6 months from now. If I go with the EF 200mm f/2, then I think I ought to sell my EF 400mm f/5.6. Then I could also add either a 5D mkIII or a 1Dx. I'm thinking the prices of those two bodies will drop as the new releases are made. They are both fine cameras in my eyes.

If I go with adding the EF 600mm f/4 IS ii... then that will be it for the year.

What should I do and should I sell the 400mm f/5.6 when I get the 200mm f/2? I have the Canon EX 2iii, so I think I'd have 400mm covered.

I'll never be pro, but I do like the pro gear and want to work hard towards producing photos like a lot of you pros produce. My little place has no art on the walls. Not one single painting or photo. When I do hang any, it might as well be mine. Thanks guys!

 

[Rahul]

2. Shoot portraits at no charge (So I can practice more and learn the art. If I've learned anything, it is absolutely a fine art that some of you have honed beautifully).

Personally, I don't agree with the above. If all you want to do is practice, have your girlfriend model for you. Don't shoot portraits free of charge. If you do make portraits, do it for a fee, albeit only to cover the printing charges + nominal markup and give the models the prints as well as the digital images.

 

[Ozarker]

2. Shoot portraits at no charge (So I can practice more and learn the art. If I've learned anything, it is absolutely a fine art that some of you have honed beautifully).

Personally, I don't agree with the above. If all you want to do is practice, have your girlfriend model for you. Don't shoot portraits free of charge. If you do make portraits, do it for a fee, albeit only to cover the printing charges + nominal markup and give the models the prints as well as the digital images.

I have no girlfriend. I do have a very disabled wife that is unable to pose at all. If we had children at home, I'd be golden. I see no harm in shooting portraits of friends and neighbors... then emailing them the files to print themselves. Those are the only models I'd have until I felt comfortable with my skill level. Like I said, I won't ever go pro. Thanks though!

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

1. Shoot high school and other local sporting events (As a hobby at first: providing photos free to interested players and the local small town newspaper)
2. Shoot portraits at no charge (So I can practice more and learn the art. If I've learned anything, it is absolutely a fine art that some of you have honed beautifully).
3. Photograph wildlife (especially birds).
4. Basically photograph whatever interests me, but in a slow and methodical way to develop a "style".

I lead a very simple life. Very basic. I don't buy new cars (I drive very inexpensive used cars until the wheels fall off). I live in a very basic home, and I am nearly always wearing just a pocket t-shirt, jeans, and tennis shoes. I do this so that I can afford my hobbies. Always have. I love guitars, guns, and photography. Well, I've got my guns. I have my guitars, and I still have all my own teeth. Now I want to round out my photo gear. I only tell you about my lifestyle because I would hate for somebody to assume that I'm just some guy with more money than sense. I am not. I just live in a very modest manner that allows for my hobbies...

No judgments here, but trying to understand their real needs. In its place, I manterias the equipment listed below, as there is no substitute without disadvantages of size and weight:

Canon 70D, Canon EX 2 III, Canon EF 70-200mm f / 2.8L IS II Canon EF 400 mm f / 5.6L Canon EF 40 mm f / 2.8 STM, Canon EX600-RT x4, Canon ST-E3-RT .

I did not like my Canon 50mm f1.4 and replace by Sigma Art, because it allows me to shoot truly at F1.4 with excellent sharpness and contrast. I'm surprised you want to keep your 50mm, since its 40 pancake allows the same image quality at F2.8.

But what should you buy?

Difficult to answer without knowing how much you are willing to spend, and how much weight you want to drag in your backpack. But I will try to be sensible and tips.

5D Mark iii seems to be the most versatile body for the types of photo you describe.

For portraits, 85mm L is great, but not for any object that moves quickly. I'm not a big fan of the 85mm F1.8, but I prefer the great 100mm F2, doing portraits and indoor sports very well.

I see the need for a 24-70mm (F2.8 or Image Stabilizer?) and a 16-35mm F4 IS.

I recommend practicing a lot with its 70-200mm and 400mm before deciding whether to buy another tele. If you really want to do this, the new 100-400mm seems a good alternative, with Image Stabilizer last generation.

 

[Random Orbits]

I have no girlfriend. I do have a very disabled wife that is unable to pose at all. If we had children at home, I'd be golden. I see no harm in shooting portraits of friends and neighbors... then emailing them the files to print themselves. Those are the only models I'd have until I felt comfortable with my skill level. Like I said, I won't ever go pro. Thanks though!

+1. I started looking into more formal portrait photography to take pictures of my kids. Some friends liked what I was doing, so now I take their Christmas photos. They pay me, they like their photos a lot more now than who they were using previously, and I have a bit of pin money in my pocket for the effort. I actually find posing people a lot more challenging than getting the light the way I want it, so that is one area that I'm looking to improve.

I also take photos of my kids' soccer practices and scrimmages. I send the links to the galleries to the parents, and they are very appreciative. I also get the freedom to shoot away, so putting the parents' minds at ease gets me better chances at getting the shots I want. Same thing with their class functions and parties.

If the list you produced is in the order of importance, then I'd suggest moving to FF first and picking up a good midrange zoom lens (didn't see a FF-compatible one in your gear list). FF will make a difference in noise/IQ when shooting indoor events (i.e. sports), and the DOF difference is noticeable with the larger format. It will also shift how you use your current lenses. My 70-200 became more important once I made the switch to FF. The zoom is really helpful for studio portraiture. I'd suggest moving to FF first and reassessing how you use what you currently have. Then you can decide what other lens you'd need when you start wanting to get shot that you currently can't get now.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

A 600mm lens is not going to work out well for your sports. Its the type of lens used by Photographers who must stay in a photographers box in a large stadium and is not portable enough to move around easily or quickly. It has no zoom or way to handle photos of close objects. I'd really recommend renting one first before buying. The 200-400mm is a great choice due to the zoom and built-in TC. It can be handled a little more easily using a monopod.

For the 600, you will want a good tripod and gimbal head, so add another $1500-2,000 to cover them. Don't overlook the importance of quality in heads and tripods/ monopods.

I'd also recommend taking a look at the 400mm f/2.8, its the standard for sports due to its f/2.8 light gathering capability and also check out the 400mm DO f/4 IS II, its light weight and can be handheld, or use a monopod. I would not get any of these until you first have a 70-200mm f/2.8 and a 24-70mm L. These will cover all sports but those that use large fields like football and soccer, where you will have to move with the action to use them.

Finally, consider two cameras, one with a 70-200 plus one with a 400mm DO. You can carry both, and the 2nd camera / DO combination with monopod and head will cost about the same or probably less than a 600mm with tripod and gimbal head. This gives redundancy and flexibility.

 

[chauncey]

Let me preface this by saying that in my early forays into this hobby I bought nearly every L lens
that Canon produced under 300mm f/2.8...yeah, stupid me. I now use exclusively a 180 macro
and that 300mm with/without a 2X TC.

The more I shot, the more anal retentive I got and those two lenses offer the best in the MFT charts.
And, I became terribly efficient at Photoshop...if I want a wide shot, merely photo-merge.

Every lens has it's own idiosyncrasies and it's a lot easier to master two or three rather than half a dozen.

On a side note...that new 5Ds camera would be my first purchase.

 

[takesome1]

Define your interests. Pick one from your list, and choose the lens that fits that description.
So far from your list it appears you should own every L lens and body Canon makes.

1. Shoot high school and other local sporting events (As a hobby at first: providing photos free to interested players and the local small town newspaper)
2. Shoot portraits at no charge (So I can practice more and learn the art. If I've learned anything, it is absolutely a fine art that some of you have honed beautifully).
3. Photograph wildlife (especially birds).
4. Basically photograph whatever interests me, but in a slow and methodical way to develop a "style".

The 600mm will only apply to #3 and only if you stick with "especially birds". If that is your main interest then go that direction.

 

[sagittariansrock]

Just my 2 cents, but at the point I want to transition from 'unconscious incompetence' (a word photographer Jen Rosenbaum uses to mean I don't know what I'm doing wrong) to 'conscious competence' (I know I am getting it right, but I have to make a conscious effort) I would spend any money and time available towards attending courses and workshops. Lenses will make less of a difference to my photography than knowing what to do with them will.
Please don't think of this as patronizing- I am also in the unconscious incompetence stage and this is precisely what I intend to do in the next few months. You might notice a bunch of lenses in my signature- so why the contradiction? That's because no one told me what I am telling you, and I made the mistake of prioritizing purchases over mastering what I already had.
So, if I were you I'd get a 5D III or even a 6D, some good lenses to match your interests (a 24-70 and 70-200 will cover everything) and hold off on the 200 and 600 until I am certain that I have completely mastered what I have.

 

[Ripley]

Sell all your non-L glass and the T5i. Buy a FF camera and a 24-70mm II. If you miss having a fast prime, buy a Sigma 35mm art or a Sigma 50mm art.

 

[FTb-n]

You didn't state what 'L' lenses you have. From your description of your interests, I would start with the EF 70-200 f2.8L IS II and the EF 24-70 f2.8L II. For wildlife and outdoor sports, add the new EF 100-400. Then go with the 5D3, maybe two of them. If money is available, the 1Dx would be a great alternative. Personally, I like shooting with two bodies and currently use two 5D3's. But, I would seriously consider one 5D3 and one 1Dx.

Of course, this is general advice. The above "kit" can cover a wide variety of subjects and venues.

 

[dcm]

I agree with others that suggest the first purchase is FF body. I had purchased only L lenses from the start, only had the kit lens for my APS which I never used. I went from 550d to 6d and it made a bigger difference than any lens purchase. There was a learning curve on the 6d as lens choices changed in some circumstances. I got familiar with my existing lenses on FF before I started buying additional lenses to address gaps and new capabilities. I'm now to the point of upgrading a few lenses.

The forum is a great place to learn and see what others can do with their equipment and why they chose a particular piece of gear. But I think only you can really understand your needs and what will help your photography.

 

[Ozarker]

You didn't state what 'L' lenses you have. From your description of your interests, I would start with the EF 70-200 f2.8L IS II and the EF 24-70 f2.8L II. For wildlife and outdoor sports, add the new EF 100-400. Then go with the 5D3, maybe two of them. If money is available, the 1Dx would be a great alternative. Personally, I like shooting with two bodies and currently use two 5D3's. But, I would seriously consider one 5D3 and one 1Dx.

Of course, this is general advice. The above "kit" can cover a wide variety of subjects and venues.

Sorry, what I already have is in my signature.

I agree with all of you that said it... a FF camera is very important. I am very set on the EF 200 f/2L, or the EF 600 f/4L for this year. If I go with the EF 200 f/2 then the FF body will also be bought this year. I should have said that I will also be getting the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L because that will be an obvious hole to fill, but I'm not having any debate with myself on that one. It must be done. The EF 400mm f/2.8L IS ii will also be done in a couple of years.

The sticky point for me is between the 200 f/2L and the 600 f/4L for this year. The EF 200mm f/2 will work for sports and be great for indoor sports. It will also work for birds with an extender attached. My purpose for the 600mm would be for birds, other wildlife and daylight outdoor sports.

Thanks for all your responses guys.

 

[Ozarker]

I have no girlfriend. I do have a very disabled wife that is unable to pose at all. If we had children at home, I'd be golden. I see no harm in shooting portraits of friends and neighbors... then emailing them the files to print themselves. Those are the only models I'd have until I felt comfortable with my skill level. Like I said, I won't ever go pro. Thanks though!

+1. I started looking into more formal portrait photography to take pictures of my kids. Some friends liked what I was doing, so now I take their Christmas photos. They pay me, they like their photos a lot more now than who they were using previously, and I have a bit of pin money in my pocket for the effort. I actually find posing people a lot more challenging than getting the light the way I want it, so that is one area that I'm looking to improve.

I also take photos of my kids' soccer practices and scrimmages. I send the links to the galleries to the parents, and they are very appreciative. I also get the freedom to shoot away, so putting the parents' minds at ease gets me better chances at getting the shots I want. Same thing with their class functions and parties.

If the list you produced is in the order of importance, then I'd suggest moving to FF first and picking up a good midrange zoom lens (didn't see a FF-compatible one in your gear list). FF will make a difference in noise/IQ when shooting indoor events (i.e. sports), and the DOF difference is noticeable with the larger format. It will also shift how you use your current lenses. My 70-200 became more important once I made the switch to FF. The zoom is really helpful for studio portraiture. I'd suggest moving to FF first and reassessing how you use what you currently have. Then you can decide what other lens you'd need when you start wanting to get shot that you currently can't get now.

Yup! This is exactly the sort of thing I am talking about.

Now, from the guitar forums I have discovered that some "professional" players hate open mic nights at clubs because they feel it steals work away from them they would otherwise have. I disagree with that. The bars have open mic nights because they are fun and it brings in more people than these "pros" can bring in. No true pro who's any good has anything to fear from an open mic night. I think he's just angry because he thinks he's a pro and open mic night is more fun than he is.

I can see that there may be some professional photographers in town that might feel like their toes are being stepped on if there is another guy there doing for free what he charges for. I still would have to disagree. I wouldn't be making any prints and if the guy or gal is real good, an amateur like myself would not be a threat. I would see myself as doing something for folks that couldn't or wouldn't buy his product to begin with. Someone that is really good has nothing to fear from me. However, should I ever become great, I'll gladly take the business he does not satisfy. Nobody owns the turf.

 

[Ozarker]

So far from your list it appears you should own every L lens and body Canon makes.

That's funny! There are dozens of "L" lenses. I think the 24-70mm 2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L, 200mm f/2L, 400mm f/2.8L, and the 600mm f/4L would have me covered all around. That's just 5 "L" lenses out of dozens. I'll probably sell my 400mm f/5.6L once I get the 200mm f/2L. The 200mm f/2L isn't even a real necessity, I just want it... especially for portraits. If I didn't get that leans, then I'd only have 4 lenses when I was all done.

Then my 70D and adding a 5D mkiii or 1Dx should cover the bodies.

That's two cameras and 4 or 5 lenses. I don't think that is unrealistic. There are guys that have $30,000 bass boats, hot rods, Harley Davidsons, etc. or all three and more. I don't do that. Thanks to Ramen noodles a garden, and some chickens... I live a very simple life.

 

[Ozarker]

Let me preface this by saying that in my early forays into this hobby I bought nearly every L lens
that Canon produced under 300mm f/2.8...yeah, stupid me. I now use exclusively a 180 macro
and that 300mm with/without a 2X TC.

The more I shot, the more anal retentive I got and those two lenses offer the best in the MFT charts.
And, I became terribly efficient at Photoshop...if I want a wide shot, merely photo-merge.

Every lens has it's own idiosyncrasies and it's a lot easier to master two or three rather than half a dozen.

On a side note...that new 5Ds camera would be my first purchase.

Great choices!

 

[Ozarker]

Just my 2 cents, but at the point I want to transition from 'unconscious incompetence' (a word photographer Jen Rosenbaum uses to mean I don't know what I'm doing wrong) to 'conscious competence' (I know I am getting it right, but I have to make a conscious effort) I would spend any money and time available towards attending courses and workshops. Lenses will make less of a difference to my photography than knowing what to do with them will.
Please don't think of this as patronizing- I am also in the unconscious incompetence stage and this is precisely what I intend to do in the next few months. You might notice a bunch of lenses in my signature- so why the contradiction? That's because no one told me what I am telling you, and I made the mistake of prioritizing purchases over mastering what I already had.
So, if I were you I'd get a 5D III or even a 6D, some good lenses to match your interests (a 24-70 and 70-200 will cover everything) and hold off on the 200 and 600 until I am certain that I have completely mastered what I have.

I have books and do run through many, many online tutorials. Great advice! Thanks!

 

[takesome1]

So far from your list it appears you should own every L lens and body Canon makes.

That's funny! There are dozens of "L" lenses. I think the 24-70mm 2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L, 200mm f/2L, 400mm f/2.8L, and the 600mm f/4L would have me covered all around. That's just 5 "L" lenses out of dozens. I'll probably sell my 400mm f/5.6L once I get the 200mm f/2L. The 200mm f/2L isn't even a real necessity, I just want it... especially for portraits. If I didn't get that leans, then I'd only have 4 lenses when I was all done.

Then my 70D and adding a 5D mkiii or 1Dx should cover the bodies.

That's two cameras and 4 or 5 lenses. I don't think that is unrealistic. There are guys that have $30,000 bass boats, hot rods, Harley Davidsons, etc. or all three and more. I don't do that. Thanks to Ramen noodles a garden, and some chickens... I live a very simple life.

Just focus and you will find your answers.

IMO and the way I pick my gear is that I try and have the best for what I really prefer. I like landscape, macro and wildlife. But wildlife is my favorite, it is why I went in to this hobby. So with your choices I would go for the 600mm first.

 

[candc]

I would get a ff body to go along with what you already have, your 50 and 70-200 are good for portraits, especially with ff.

Nothing wrong with getting what you want but if you have to ask if you should get something then you don't need it.

 

[Ozarker]

I would get a ff body to go along with what you already have, your 50 and 70-200 are good for portraits, especially with ff.

Nothing wrong with getting what you want but if you have to ask if you should get something then you don't need it.

Thanks for the advice. I didn't ask what I should get, just what order I should get them in. I know what I want and will get what I want. Just wondered what the practical order should be. I'm thinking more towards a FF body and the 200mm f/2L first. When it comes right down to it, except for one who makes his living at this... the rest of us don't "need" any of it. Thanks again.