Hitting the limits of my lens

[Joel]

Hi photogs,

When I started out with photography I ended up buying glass to cover the focallenghts I would like to cover. So next to my 400D's kitlens I purchased a Canon 55-200mm f/4-5.6 USM to give me some extra reach. I bought several books, joined a photoclub and gained a bit of skill. The idea of buying some topnotch glass came up a few times, but my rational mind kicked in []I made an agreement with conscious that I will only upgrade my equipment if it was holding back my creativity or IQ of my pictures.


When viewing my pictures on web resolutions (aka Flickr medium size) everything looks great. To be honest, I was quite proud achieving this kind of photo "quality" with "just" the standard kitlens. When using my pictures full screen, I miss the clarity and sharpness I would like to see [example].

This would justify the purchase of a new lens. Agree? Which brings up the next question: Which lens? With the use of this site and a friend, I came to the conclusion that the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 USM is the way to go for several reasons.

1. The big aperture will give me some extra freedom when using my lens in certain light conditions. The shallow DoF across the whole range is just awesome.
2. Let's face it, Canon makes some great glass, and the IQ for the zoom lens is just great.
3. Some rigidness. I'm no clumsy person and I take care of my stuff, maybe a bit too much. I would like to have a lens which is a bit more decent and less toylike.
4. Can't blame the equipment. I'll be shooting with prosumer (zoom) glass. If this pictures turn out crap, I can only blame myself for doing it wrong [].

<div>This lens will complement my Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 which helps me cover the lower end of my reach compared to the Canon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6. </div>
<div></div>
<div>With its 1100 Euro price tag, this is - of course - quite a purchase, but will hopefully serve me well in the years to come.[]</div>
<div></div>
<div>Feel free to comment on this thread. There no wrong or right here, just an insight on my decision making. I'm a gearhead - oh, we all have dreams - but I only buy what I can justify. Or is it just my greedy Dutch blood kickin' in...</div>

[Oren]

The link is not working - it sends me to Yahoo and asks me to sign in.

[Sean Setters]

I think he has the permission level set to private so that others can't view the image.

[Joel]

Yep, my bad. Changed my Flickr permissions now.

[Oren]

Joel, I saw your pictures at Flickr, you've got some really great stuff there.

[Feanor]

While I can understand your desire to justify buying a better lens, I think you're going a bit far (I thought I was bad!). L glass is easily justifiable for me for the following reasons:


- It doesn't lose its value much. If you find you need the money, or get bored of photography and decide to switch hobbies, you can get your money back.


- It's a much more worthwhile purchase than most other luxury purchases people make. Cars lose value at a scary rate (I've not had a car for 2 years for the first time since I was 17, so I keep using this justification to buy more gear ). Other hobbies cost just as much but aren't so rewarding in the long term - and aren't such a good investment.


- You work hard for your money, enjoy it! Especially as you're putting it into something useful that holds its value.





You won't be disappointed with the 70-200 f2.8 or any L glass for that matter, and it will help you take your photography to the next level. Good gear may not make a 'tog but cheap gear can hold him back!

[mpphoto12]

well if i have learned something about hitting your limits..... anticipate your growth and next purchase start saving now for what comes next because once your like me and grow out of an Xt and want a 50D but have no money... wel...... it sucks considering im a highschool student with absolutely no money and no job... and no time for one anytime soon.... yeah stinks lol only ine good piece of glass as well... 70-200 2.8..... use it for everything becasue the kit lens is soooo bad