Buying my first L lens- Not an easy choice

[Kenny]

You guys scare me

[elmo_2006]

A couple of months ago, I was at an indoor hockey game watching and taking photos of my bosses kids playing. Along came a gentleman with the 300/2.8 mounted on a 1D Mark xx (can't recall) which in turn mounted to monopod and the conversation started:


me: Wow, great rig, love the lens


him: Thanks, she sure is.


me: You know, that's one of my dream lenses.


him: An awesome lens and great for those tight shots


me: Not sure if it deserves to be on my little Xsi


him: Why not, but you will be snapping up photos of this game from the parking lot


me: LOL


him: Besides, unless you plan on making money (as he is an actual photographer), this lens deserves to be utilized on a FF or an APS-H camera, your choice of the 70-200 2.8 is a good choice.........


Suffice to say, these guys in these forums are correct and do know what they are saying, stick with the mentioned lenses and you won't be disappointed. But hey, if you've got the dough, the sky's the limit!

[Kenny]

The money I save will go to some books I think those big lens are for the pros , sure I could buy it but thats not a reason im more interested in learning more and buying what I need.


This is a great forum for a beginer


Thanks again

[RonG]

If you are going to stay with a 1.6 crop factor then buy a Canon 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM lens and a canon 70-200mm f2.8 L IS USM lens. this combo will bring you close to or a little over 3 grand. If you plan on upgrading to APS-H or FF then get the canon 24-70 f2.8 L USM lens instead of the 17-55mm. This Two lens combo will cover everything you will need even for football and soccer. Use the remaining 1300 dollars from the price of the 300 f2.8 to buy a good image software like lightroom or aperture, Noise Ninja for noise reduction and genuine fractals to create any size enlargement you want. You might even have enough left over to get a nice 50mm f1.4 lens to boot. And IMHO you will never regret spending more money on canon lenses vs. less expensive 3rd party (caveat, I love my sigma 50mm f1.4). Good Luck

[Daniel Browning]

The 300 f/2.8 is really a 480 f/4.5 on your body

You've got a good point to make, but I think there is a better way to phrase it. For example:
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"]"The 300mm f/2.8 your body is really equivalent to 480 f/4.5 on full frame."


I think the difference is important. 300mm f/2.8 is always 300mm f/2.8, no matter what body you put it on. But when you compare angle of view, the 300mm on the 7D is equivalent to 480mm on the 5D2. And when you compare noise, 300mm f/2.8 on the 7D is equivalent to 480mm f/4.5 on the 5D2.

f/4 on FF is brighter than f/4 on 1.6. You need a slower shutter speed on a 1.6 to get the same brightness.

If you replaced brightness with noise, I would agree with that statement. Personally, I consider noise to be a much more important factor than brightness. (Brightness just requires a slight adjustment in the raw converter -- if that.)

[Atomhot]

f/4 on FF is brighter than f/4 on 1.6. You need a slower shutter speed on a 1.6 to get the same brightness.

If you replaced brightness with noise, I would agree with that statement. Personally, I consider noise to be a much more important factor than brightness. (Brightness just requires a slight adjustment in the raw converter -- if that.)
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

hmm&hellip; The noise on a FF ( 5Dmkii ) @ &fnof;4 should be less than the noise on a 1.6 ( 7D ) @ &fnof;4 for the same lens, shutter, aperture et al.

[Kenny]

Ok time to dumb this thread down a little. I have been reading a lot of previous posts and i think some basic selections are starting to make sense. I must say some of the pictures you guys have posted just amaze me. Once you begin to shoot outside and at distance how do you know what is the correct lens or is it just a matter of learning as you gain more experience and your skills improve. I am just overwhelmed when I begin to think about the proper lens for every different subject. The only time I really cant take pictures is at an airshow I go to once a year the subjects are just to far away even on the ground. I know I cant afford anything to get these shots but I have been try to figure out how do you select the bestlens for Short/intermediate /long distance indoor vs outdoor. My guess is there is no simple answer because of all the variables but what questions do you ask yourself as you think about your subject and how you will prepare.

[Brendan7]

The money I save will go to some books I think those big lens are for the pros , sure I could buy it but thats not a reason im more interested in learning more and buying what I need.


This is a great forum for a beginer


Thanks again

You seem to have a very good idea of what to do: learn more and buy what you need. So many photographers don't learn and buy what they would never need. Good Luck with your purchase, whatever it may be. Again, I suggest the 70-200 f/2.8 and 135 f/2. But I'm sure whatever you choose will suit you just fine.


brendan

[Sinh Nhut Nguyen]

I don't shoot sport, so I can't comment, but I recently read this article on Adorama Learning Center. I think it's somewhat helpful for you, it's about shooting basketball.


http://www.adorama.com/alc/article/How-to-photograph-basketball-games

[Kenny]

Im going to get the 70-200 as everyone recomended its suits my all around needs the best until I refine what my primary interests are. It seems to be the one lens everyone uses for several different applications. I was happy with point and shoot until I saw the images here,the color and clarity.... didnt know it was possible.