Only 1 lens
- Thread starter Dark Reality
- Start date
- Status
Dark Reality said:
Just some ramblings...
If you sell your stuff, will it help? The sale of these items is a one time cash infusion, then that's it.
You won't get what you paid for it, nor will you be able to re-purchase the items for less at a later date.*
*lenses, at least. Once in a lifetime deals excluded. Bodies and electronic accessories don't hold their value.
If your items are paid for, then that makes it harder.
If you have money issues now, then I'd sit down and think about the "why" part before selling . If you don't, then the underlying problem will return.
If you have cable TV or an expensive phone plan, I'd ditch that before selling the photography gear that has some meaning to you.
I am not asking for any explanations with respect to your situation, but I do know that if you sell and then re-purchase then you have no choices to equal what you have for less money, which will be a constant reminder with every image.
Upvote
0
I agree with Neuro. Excellent combination or, you just keep the 5D2 and 50mm 1.8 for now and sell the rest.Dark Reality said:
Also, you can always sell the remaining gear if it is necessary.
Now if you get/keep exactly what neuro suggests (5D2, 24-105, 430EX + 50 1.8 ) you could probably use that gear to make some extra money if you find couples that cannot afford expensive photographers for their wedding for example.
Upvote
0
selling everything means I can't get pictures like this one (which I printed 13x19)
needless to say, I've got some thinking to do, and all of your advice have helped.
needless to say, I've got some thinking to do, and all of your advice have helped.
Upvote
0
You could probably do a XTi silver plus a 40 pancake for about $300. I have some shots (that I didn't take myself) from a XTi and Sigma 50 1.4 that are fantastic, and the pancake 40 will be great as well. LOL, I should probably do this to replace our P&S.
My opinion is many of us (as I point to myself) have way more camera than we actually need. Not that that is a bad thing, in fact it's actually a good thing in a way. Because if we need to downgrade, we can still find someting to give us some nice shots.
Here's a shot with an XTi and Sigma 50 at f1.4 (too shallow DOF for my tastes):
My opinion is many of us (as I point to myself) have way more camera than we actually need. Not that that is a bad thing, in fact it's actually a good thing in a way. Because if we need to downgrade, we can still find someting to give us some nice shots.
Here's a shot with an XTi and Sigma 50 at f1.4 (too shallow DOF for my tastes):
Attachments
Upvote
0
verysimplejason said:
I'd do the same except maybe pick up the 40STM (~$150) instead of the 50/1.8 II (~$110). That said, if you have the 50mm, you may want to keep it to save money though not as wide as the 40mm. I'd also grab a used 70-300mm (<$300) to act as a tele. This may enable you to skip the 24-105 (~$800).
On the full-frame you'd then have a wide/normal-ish 40mm or 50mm and you'd have a tele range, the 70-300mm. If you had the money to upgrade, the Canon 70-200 f/4 is quite a bit sharper than the 70-300mm.
Alternatively, if you really want to start over, then I'd consider a 7D, with 15-85mm, and a 430ex. You could probably pick up all of these for <$1300. I just sold my 7D and 15-85 for $1,150. It's sharp, just not fast.
Upvote
0
skitron said:
How close were you to the subject? I tend to stay as far as possible to get as natural look as I can. And moving forward and backwards in combination with zooming in and out let's me control the depth of field while still keeping things framed as I like. .... Something I muggy not be able to do with a prime. Although I do like that shot
Upvote
0
Dark Reality said:skitron said:
How close were you to the subject? I tend to stay as far as possible to get as natural look as I can. And moving forward and backwards in combination with zooming in and out let's me control the depth of field while still keeping things framed as I like. .... Something I muggy not be able to do with a prime. Although I do like that shot
I didn't take that shot myself but if I recall, distance was about 5 feet or so. Yes, you lose some control when you go to prime, but as for DOF, it's pretty controllable with aperture.
Also another lens suggestion is the old 28-135. I had one for a short while and it is not nearly the POS a lot of people say it is imo. I did a side by side comparison to a 24-105L and the 28-135 had slightly worse bokeh and color renditions not quite as nice, but again, very nice lens IMO for a couple of hundred bucks...sharpness was basically identical between the two lenses I compared. Last time I checked it was about $200 used on eBay. I'd rather have it than the 18-55 kit lens any day, but then I tend to like longer lenses. And it sounds like maybe you do as well, so it might be a fit for you in a pinch.
You aren't going to get the IQ of a 5D2 and 70-200 with an XTi and 28-135 for sure, but you'd probably be shocked at how close you do get with it. IQ and price is not a linear scale for sure...
If you really can't justify tying up that much money in camera gear right now but you want to keep shooting, there are a number of low $ options that will preserve your memories nicely.
Upvote
0
Dark Reality said:
That's a tough but very responsible decision. Here's the thing though: with a 9-moth old around you want to take pictures of the little one. The landscapes will still be there later. Kids are only little once. I wish I had had a good digital camera around when mine were that little. Shot lots of film though and I glad I did.
Everything else depends on your style of shooting I suppose. I wouldn't sell the 5DII. At this point it's not worth it. Everything else can go and is still very good resale value.
I personally would want a fast 50. Either of them would do. However, you might consider keeping the 24-70. The 24-105 is not a good replacement in my opinion. At least not for gaining, what, 200 bucks or so?
Any chance you can make a few extra bucks otherwise?
And speaking of film: crazy thought but here is something I would consider if I had to give it all up and go really cheap. P&S or even anything APS-C wouldn't be an option for me at all. How much is a decent used medium format film camera with a 110 or 150mm lens?? Few hundred bucks? Plus the ongoing cost of film, developing and prints of course - which is a good motivation to think first and shoot later. I know, crazy.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
One more opinion:
I think this depends on how serious your financial concerns are. If you are in a situation where you really have to liquidate everything, I'd look at a high-end powershot (G1-X?) as a substitute. But, I agree with Neuro and others in that you are likely to take a bath on your current camera.
I'd suggest a refurbished 24-105 and sell your other two lenses, keeping the 580EX, the 5DII and the 50 1.8. This is the minimum compromise option. You'll be able to do 90% of what you were doing before, but net a little cash.
Option 3 (between the Powershot and keeping the 5DII) would be a T3i, a refurbished 15-85 EF-S and keep the 580EX and the 50 1.8. This is essentially the same "kit" as above except in an APS-C version. Would cost you about $1,100.
Option 3A: T3i kit with the 18-55 kit lens and the 55-250 zoom. Available for under $800. (The 55-250 is a very sharp lens. I'm not so sure about the 18-55, although I have heard that the current IS version is much improved over previous versions -- I don't own this lens).
With careful composition, holding the ISO to around 400 and keeping print sizes under 30" at the largest end, no one but you will ever know the shots were made on a crop camera instead of the 5DII.
I think this depends on how serious your financial concerns are. If you are in a situation where you really have to liquidate everything, I'd look at a high-end powershot (G1-X?) as a substitute. But, I agree with Neuro and others in that you are likely to take a bath on your current camera.
I'd suggest a refurbished 24-105 and sell your other two lenses, keeping the 580EX, the 5DII and the 50 1.8. This is the minimum compromise option. You'll be able to do 90% of what you were doing before, but net a little cash.
Option 3 (between the Powershot and keeping the 5DII) would be a T3i, a refurbished 15-85 EF-S and keep the 580EX and the 50 1.8. This is essentially the same "kit" as above except in an APS-C version. Would cost you about $1,100.
Option 3A: T3i kit with the 18-55 kit lens and the 55-250 zoom. Available for under $800. (The 55-250 is a very sharp lens. I'm not so sure about the 18-55, although I have heard that the current IS version is much improved over previous versions -- I don't own this lens).
With careful composition, holding the ISO to around 400 and keeping print sizes under 30" at the largest end, no one but you will ever know the shots were made on a crop camera instead of the 5DII.
Upvote
0
I agree with the multiple users suggesting the t3i, and t4i. Sure the kit lenses aren't the sharpest things in the world from a professional standpoint, but these are extremely capable cameras (& lenses) that can get great results for plenty of people. Technology keeps getting better and better but people seem to often forget that these "entry level" DSLRs are much more powerful than the professional ones not that long ago.
I say get a t3i or t4i kit package, and when you're in a better place financially start upgrading lenses.
I say get a t3i or t4i kit package, and when you're in a better place financially start upgrading lenses.
Upvote
0
What about a Tamron 28-75mm 2.8? Or a Canon 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM or 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5?
The Tamron would cost less than a Canon 24-105mm (albeit with less range and a larger aperture). The Canon lenses are essentially f/4 and have reasonable build quality, real USM, and can be picked up used for $200 or less. They won't have the image quality as the 24-105, but then again neither will any crop camera with anything except a 17-55mm f/2.8.
I say keep the 5D2 and 50mm f/1.8 II and spend a couple hundred on some cheap discontinued model lenses. I picked up my Tamron 19-35mm for $90 (although I think it normally goes for $100-125, I just got a good deal on eBay), my 28-105mm was $110, and 70-210mm was $140. So my 3 zooms put together was only $340. I think that's a heck of a kit for less than half of the lowest price L lens. I can't justify putting hundreds of dollars into each lens for my hobby, and I'm ok with the image quality of the lenses I have (althought, the 70-210mm is a little disappointing at 210mm). Its has taken me quite some time to put my whole kit together, but I'm constantly looking for good deals on used stuff to add to it without breaking the bank.
EDIT: Additionally, the Canon 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM normally goes for $160-200 on eBay for the wide end when you want to continue shooting landscapes, etc.
The Tamron would cost less than a Canon 24-105mm (albeit with less range and a larger aperture). The Canon lenses are essentially f/4 and have reasonable build quality, real USM, and can be picked up used for $200 or less. They won't have the image quality as the 24-105, but then again neither will any crop camera with anything except a 17-55mm f/2.8.
I say keep the 5D2 and 50mm f/1.8 II and spend a couple hundred on some cheap discontinued model lenses. I picked up my Tamron 19-35mm for $90 (although I think it normally goes for $100-125, I just got a good deal on eBay), my 28-105mm was $110, and 70-210mm was $140. So my 3 zooms put together was only $340. I think that's a heck of a kit for less than half of the lowest price L lens. I can't justify putting hundreds of dollars into each lens for my hobby, and I'm ok with the image quality of the lenses I have (althought, the 70-210mm is a little disappointing at 210mm). Its has taken me quite some time to put my whole kit together, but I'm constantly looking for good deals on used stuff to add to it without breaking the bank.
EDIT: Additionally, the Canon 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM normally goes for $160-200 on eBay for the wide end when you want to continue shooting landscapes, etc.
Upvote
0
I know this is a few days old, but I wanted to weigh in with my thoughts as a new parent. Obviously nobody knows your financial situation, and you can't choose photography over diapers, but I wouldn't unload my gear just yet. If you love taking pictures, you're going to love taking pictures of your baby. In months three through six, I downloaded about 1,000 frames off all of our cameras. If I had unloaded my gear or downgraded before the baby came, it would be the single biggest regret of my parenting career.
If you've been shooting top of the line gear, you're just going to be frustrated. I shoot an older T1i and I'm saving my pennies for a 6D. I can't imagine downgrading now. As for you downgrading to a rebel, about the only argument in favor of this in my eyes would be to get a T4i with the 18-135 STM, because you'll want good video. However, dedicated video cameras are cheap and having a second camera also lets mom or grandparents get involved.
To me, this is more of a question of lens selection. I would keep your standard zoom and your fifty, for sure. The only one I question is the 70-200, because you'll never be far enough away to use it. I might unload it and pick up a 100L for portraits and quasi-macro (hands, feet, etc) or maybe a 135 (everybody says it's great) with some tubes for the close focus. The other thing I suggest is more wide-angle of some sort. I won't weigh in on selection, but once the baby can move, he's going to be crawling towards the camera, and fast. I have the 20mm (on crop about 32mm) and I'm always backing up with it. A 17-40 or even a 20-35 might get a lot of use, even on full frame, and help conserve your budget.
A point and shoot is a good idea, although if you have decent smartphones and don't keep your DSLR in a lockbox, you might not use it. I got the g1x, and the image quality is great, although it's a little sluggish. However, with a compact case, we take it all over (Wrigley field, pumpkin patch, weekend trips to Grandma's) and it is great to not lug a DSLR bag with all the rest of the baby gear. We also have Elphs but the iphones take far more pictures than those.
Most important thing is just using them. Our cameras sit out on shelves, ready to go, because you can't dig through a bag when he's having a "first". Because the iphones take P&S quality snaps, I haven't stuffed an Elph in the diaper bag permanently, but my wife usually carries hers in her purse. Read Ken Rockwell's article on why your wife wants you to buy better camera gear. It's a bit sexist and nauseating, but the principle is pretty close. I was never into portraiture, but I bought a flash, I'm trying to build a DIY ringflash, and looking at all sorts of umbrellas and stuff, too. I wouldn't bother selling your 580, in fact, I'd start looking at lighting for your DIY baby portraits. We took all sorts of home-made newborn photos, and, although they are nowhere near the quality that we got from the pro baby portrait studio, they are great, they're mine, and they are great memories to have from a time when all your baby does is sleep and poop.
If none of this helps you, then just take neuroanatomist's advice. He's pretty much always right and never full of BS, from what I've read.
If you've been shooting top of the line gear, you're just going to be frustrated. I shoot an older T1i and I'm saving my pennies for a 6D. I can't imagine downgrading now. As for you downgrading to a rebel, about the only argument in favor of this in my eyes would be to get a T4i with the 18-135 STM, because you'll want good video. However, dedicated video cameras are cheap and having a second camera also lets mom or grandparents get involved.
To me, this is more of a question of lens selection. I would keep your standard zoom and your fifty, for sure. The only one I question is the 70-200, because you'll never be far enough away to use it. I might unload it and pick up a 100L for portraits and quasi-macro (hands, feet, etc) or maybe a 135 (everybody says it's great) with some tubes for the close focus. The other thing I suggest is more wide-angle of some sort. I won't weigh in on selection, but once the baby can move, he's going to be crawling towards the camera, and fast. I have the 20mm (on crop about 32mm) and I'm always backing up with it. A 17-40 or even a 20-35 might get a lot of use, even on full frame, and help conserve your budget.
A point and shoot is a good idea, although if you have decent smartphones and don't keep your DSLR in a lockbox, you might not use it. I got the g1x, and the image quality is great, although it's a little sluggish. However, with a compact case, we take it all over (Wrigley field, pumpkin patch, weekend trips to Grandma's) and it is great to not lug a DSLR bag with all the rest of the baby gear. We also have Elphs but the iphones take far more pictures than those.
Most important thing is just using them. Our cameras sit out on shelves, ready to go, because you can't dig through a bag when he's having a "first". Because the iphones take P&S quality snaps, I haven't stuffed an Elph in the diaper bag permanently, but my wife usually carries hers in her purse. Read Ken Rockwell's article on why your wife wants you to buy better camera gear. It's a bit sexist and nauseating, but the principle is pretty close. I was never into portraiture, but I bought a flash, I'm trying to build a DIY ringflash, and looking at all sorts of umbrellas and stuff, too. I wouldn't bother selling your 580, in fact, I'd start looking at lighting for your DIY baby portraits. We took all sorts of home-made newborn photos, and, although they are nowhere near the quality that we got from the pro baby portrait studio, they are great, they're mine, and they are great memories to have from a time when all your baby does is sleep and poop.
If none of this helps you, then just take neuroanatomist's advice. He's pretty much always right and never full of BS, from what I've read.
Upvote
0
S
seta666
Guest
I would keep the EOS 5D mkII if you can afford it, sell the rest. Second hand value of the 5D mkII is going down very fast, you have camera for years and for your photography needs neither 6D or 5D mkIII offer you much benefit (AF precission for portraits only)
For landscape I would buy a second hand Sigma 24-60 2.8; it is an amaizing little lens for the price (around 250$ second hand), if you need wider than that a canon 20-35 can be found cheap and might do the job until you can afford something better
For portraits I would buy a Contax/Yashica 50mm f1.4 and a C/Y-EOS AF confirm adapter (around 80$); in my opinion it is better quality than the Canon 50/1.4 at a fraction of the cost if you can live with manual focus/aperture
If you can not afford kto keep the 5D mkII and want to go APS-C I would go for a Nikon D7000 or D5200 and something like a tokina 12-24 and a 50/1.8 manual nikon. I do not recomend canon APS-C for landscape because of its poor DR
For landscape I would buy a second hand Sigma 24-60 2.8; it is an amaizing little lens for the price (around 250$ second hand), if you need wider than that a canon 20-35 can be found cheap and might do the job until you can afford something better
For portraits I would buy a Contax/Yashica 50mm f1.4 and a C/Y-EOS AF confirm adapter (around 80$); in my opinion it is better quality than the Canon 50/1.4 at a fraction of the cost if you can live with manual focus/aperture
If you can not afford kto keep the 5D mkII and want to go APS-C I would go for a Nikon D7000 or D5200 and something like a tokina 12-24 and a 50/1.8 manual nikon. I do not recomend canon APS-C for landscape because of its poor DR
Upvote
0
You might want to read more carefully before replying. He's trying to free up some funds for his baby*, not asking for 'best regardless of money'.Danielle said:
*) literally. I know, I'm attached to my 5D3 too, but we're talking one with ten little fingers an' ten little toes an' everything.
Upvote
0
markm said:
+1
If family comes first, then aps-c is the best option, or wait for the new aps-c lineup for early 2013.
If you insist on having ff, keep the 5d, andmaybe try to stretch your budget for the canon 28-300, I know it's hefty, it is all I can come up with that will give you great quality.
But if size is more important than quality, check out the tamron 18-270.
Upvote
0
If finances are tight, it's definitely family first. But you have to have a better camera than the one on your phone! I just got a surprisingly good G15 for $399. It's such a monumental leap forward from my last G Canon. However, if the budget allows, keeping the 5D2 and getting a 24-105 f/4is would give you a very high quality, budget solution and a wad of cash to boot. Over the past few years, a gripless 5D C, II & now III with 24-105 has been my traveling-light combination. You can do most things with this high quality combo.
-PW
-PW
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
