View Full Version : What Next?
crosbyharbison
12-04-2009, 02:58 AM
I have a canon 5d II with three lenses now:
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM ("http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f-2.8-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx)
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM ("http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM ("http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1.4-USM-Lens-Review.aspx)
I have two flashes with pocketwizards, but right now all I use are homemade modifiers (snoot, reflector, gels...).
Whats lens/accessory should my camera savings be going towards?
About my work: I like doing studio set-up portraits for fun and expect to do much more in the future. I do indoor sports for work and find 200mm to be too short for field sports but thanks to the 5d's 21 megapixel sensor that I can crop and achieve good enough quality. I maintain a portfolio/blog here ("http://www.crosbyharbison.com/) for examples.
twistedphrame
12-04-2009, 06:14 AM
Since 200mm is a little shot for outdoor sports (I assume that's what you mean by field), possibly the 400 5.6L, I've never had the opportunity to use either but I've used cheap lenses in that range and find that they provide just about the right amount of reach (300mm on 1.6x crop so 480mm). also take a look in the nature shots section for some examples of what the 400 can do it's very impressive.
Deva207
12-04-2009, 07:14 AM
like twistedphrame wrote, you can go zoom, 400 and more, or what i would do, go wide, fisheye lens... it gives you another perspective. very cool piece of glass.
Fisheye lens on flickr ("http://www.flickr.com/groups/36476633@N00/discuss/72157605803367594/)
or, you can go macro too. like this lens
Canon 100mm macro ("http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-100mm-f-2.8-L-IS-USM-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx)
Sean Setters
12-04-2009, 09:38 AM
Maybe a few more light modifiers ("/forums/p/2562/20083.aspx#20083)?
peety3
12-04-2009, 10:22 AM
If it were me, here's a likely progression I'd follow:
300/2.8IS
Second camera body
85/1.2 (for your studio work)
200/2IS (amazing lens, but tough to justify against your 70-200 if you don't have something longer)
500/4IS (if there was a call for it - it's less expensive than the 400/2.8, better than the 400/4, etc.)
If you want to concentrate your efforts on studio work, you might want to look into getting a lighting systems if you feel your Speedlites are limiting you (and you don't need the portability). If not you may want to look into theWestcott 28" Recessed Front Apollo ("http://www.amazon.com/Westcott-Apollo-Light-Modifier-Recessed/dp/B00022KOWU) softbox and/or an umbrella.
When you're earning money with your indoor sports work, you might want to add a 1.4x convertor to your list, if you're willing to sacrifice some image quality. Saves quite some money compared to a longer and faster lens (but smaller wow factor ;-)).
<span class="bodyTextSmall"]
I have a canon 5d II with three lenses now:
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM ("http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f-2.8-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx)
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM ("http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM ("http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1.4-USM-Lens-Review.aspx)
I have two flashes with pocketwizards, but right now all I use are homemade modifiers (snoot, reflector, gels...).
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>
Wow, that's what I'm trying to go for. I have the 50mm, a 580ex ii speedlite and pocketwizards with an umbrella and such. I'm working towards getting those two lenses you have as well.
Sorry, a bit offtopic but how does those 3 lenses work for you in general? any cons you can think of?
Keith B
12-04-2009, 02:53 PM
I have a canon 5d II with three lenses now:
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM ("http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f-2.8-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx)
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM ("http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx)
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM ("http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1.4-USM-Lens-Review.aspx)
I have two flashes with pocketwizards, but right now all I use are homemade modifiers (snoot, reflector, gels...).
Whats lens/accessory should my camera savings be going towards?
About my work: I like doing studio set-up portraits for fun and expect to do much more in the future. I do indoor sports for work and find 200mm to be too short for field sports but thanks to the 5d's 21 megapixel sensor that I can crop and achieve good enough quality. I maintain a portfolio/blog here ("http://www.crosbyharbison.com/) for examples.
I'd go with the 100-400L. I have this and the other lenses you mention and it finishes out the line well. With the 5DmkII I find 5.6 isn't too bad with the ability to shoot at higher ISOs. Plus I find this lens to be very sharp. Not as sharp as a prime but very good. Then I'd go for another flash and PW. Sometimes two lights aren't enough. Pick up a Photeck Softlighter II ("http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/109112-REG/Photek_SL_4000_S_Umbrella_Softlighter_II.html) too. They are little cheaper than than the Westcott (although I love my Westcott 28" SB. I have a grid for it, SWEET!) and works great.
Wow, that's what I'm trying to go for. I have the 50mm, a 580ex ii speedlite and pocketwizards with an umbrella and such. I'm working towards getting those two lenses you have as well.
Sorry, a bit offtopic but how does those 3 lenses work for you in general? any cons you can think of?
I have the 24-70, the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 50 1.4 and they all are great. I especially love the 24-70. I shoot a lot of food and product shots and it is "macro" enough to pull that off with it's .29 magnification. Plus it is just a great all around lens. I don't think anything else needs to be said about the 70-200 2.8 IS. The 50 1.4 is probably the best bargain Canon has. It is a great lens, not the sturdiest but good enough. I'd actually prefer the 35 1.4's range for my style of shooting but it isn't in my budget right now.
I also have the 16-35 2.8 II which I also love. I actually prefer this lens shooting at the 24-35 range over the 24-70. I can't put my finger on it but the images have a little something different about them. I think the subject seems to pop a little more. It might be more distortion or something, but I like it.
crosbyharbison
12-05-2009, 10:34 PM
twistedphrame: yes I meant outdoor sports. I find IS to be very useful for longer lenses, I also find the 400 f/5.6 to be too slow even on my 5d II and the lack of weather sealing is another detractor. I find no faults with the lens' level of sharpness. I find there to be a large hole in Canon's telephoto lineup; I would love it if Canon would make a 400mm f/4 IS (non-DO) for ~2,500 with weather sealing.
deva207: I think an ultrawide would be fun, I've looked into canon's 14mm and am considering it in the future; it sounds like the mark II version has dramatically improved on full frame bodies. I think a fish-eye lens would be a fun one to rent, but I don't have many practical uses for it in my work. I have easy access to the 100mm macro (non-IS) for the rare-circumstances in which I need macro for my work but I find these situations to be rare.
sean: I definitely think I should invest in some.
peety3: I really like the 300 f/2.8; its just really expensive :p, I'd like to at some point use a 1Ds mark iv as my primary body and keep the 5d for when weight is a concern (travel etc). I love the 85 for studio work, the 200 is my dream lens but is somewhat limited in its use (not long enough for sports, too long for most portraits). The only wildlife I do is mostly when I am backpacking so I think the 500 is way too much for me.
Joel: portability is a major concern to me. I don't feel limited by my Speedlites at all, I'm always learning new things; perhaps in the distant future I'll have a full profoto setup. I think a converter is a great idea in the meantime; I'm a big fan of the 1.4 converter.
zVP: One could argue that the 16-35, 50, 70-200 to be the trinity of lenses; however, I find 24mm to be wide enough on a full frame body so I am willing to trade distortion for practicality. I can think of no flaws in any of the three. I hear both the 24-70 and the 70-200 are due for an update in January with the introduction of the new 1Ds. IS would be useful on the 24-70 during video operation, but unworthy of the upgrade cost otherwise. Improvements in flare control, vignetting, distortion, chromatic aberrations, sharpness are always welcome and I suppose I'd eventually upgrade if these were strong enough factors. Until then I find these lenses to be just about perfect for my uses.
Keith: I have rented the 100-400 and found that I used 400mm 90% of the time. For that reason I'd prefer a prime lens with a wider aperture.
conclusion:
So it sound like the following are items to save up for: 300 2.8 is, 85mm 1.2, 1.4 extender, CPL filter, second body, light-modifiers.
GAButler
12-06-2009, 12:47 AM
85/1.2, nothing compares
ISAIAH
12-06-2009, 02:36 AM
All valid and good advise for youcrosbyharbison beyond the 100-400 air show lens if you are taking time with a steady tripod and do not have $7k look at the TELVUE 85mm 600mm @f7 with 2X Powermate for $2.2k.If you want to see a birds iris at 200 300 yards.With a 1.6 sensor about 1900mm for terrestrial shots about the max for air currents. The f stop goes to 14 with 2X. Using your FF 1200mm. This APO scope is practically optically flawless.
<div>
<div></div>
</div>
Sinh Nhut Nguyen
12-06-2009, 04:59 AM
Whats lens/accessory should my camera savings be going towards?
Nothing really! Only you can answer that question. You should save your money until you figure out what you really want to do. No one here knows exactly what you want in the future. Let me give you an example. I bought a 70-200 f/2.8L IS to shoot portrait andlow light even in my church and then I got hooked into bird photography. However, with the 70-200, itwas too short for bird photography so I upgraded to the 400 f/5.6L. Just shoot with what you have and as time goes on you'll find out what you really want.