what to buy? prime, telephoto or tripod!!

[maddagascar]

alright, well i can order a few things, but not sure what to get...

i'm looking at getting a manfrotto tripod which is the 7302 model...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ..._7302YB_7302YB_4_Section_Aluminum_Tripod.html

also looking at getting the 50mm prime lens with F/1.4

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12140-USA/Canon_2515A003_50mm_f_1_4_USM_Autofocus.html


but then!! i'm also wanting to get a telephoto lens either the 70-300mm w/IS

or the 70-200mm L-series lens...both with an F/4.0


i don't know what to get!!..i take pictures using my 18-55 lens kit. i love macro shots, and wish i can take landscape photos or distant, hence a telephoto..but then i want a sharper lens than my lens kit and that's where the 50mm comes in for my "walkaround lens"...its sharper and has a much lower F/stop with a 1.4..

soo please, any words of advice on what and which to get? probably a tripod for sure, but just which lens. but i'm even hoping i'm getting a good tripod that can hold either telephoto lens.

 

[kyzen]

Go spend a weekend shooting. Figure out which would've made the process more enjoyable for you. How can we tell which is the better option for *you*?

FWIW, I'd be all over the 70-200mm f/4L.

 

[maddagascar]

Go spend a weekend shooting. Figure out which would've made the process more enjoyable for you. How can we tell which is the better option for *you*?

FWIW, I'd be all over the 70-200mm f/4L.

well, i actually did that..hahaha. that's why i need all of them!!

i want the 50mm when i was walking inside a casino, taking hip shots, 50mm would've been perfect with the low F-stop.

i wanted tripod so i could've took better night photos and just need one in general.

the telephoto lens would be excellent for taking the scenic night shots, just don't know which one to get.


but why the 70-200mm L-series? the only reason why i don't know which to get is because the 70-300mm has IS, and the 70-200mm doesn't, but it is a L series quality......

 

[kyzen]

It's a higher quality lens in general. There's a reason it has the L .

The 70-300mm IS isn't bad though. I presently have the 55-250mm IS, it's been a great lens, but I want something a bit faster and sharper, the 70-200mm f/4L is second on my to-buy list, after a macbook.

What's your overall budget?

 

[maddagascar]

It's a higher quality lens in general. There's a reason it has the L .

The 70-300mm IS isn't bad though. I presently have the 55-250mm IS, it's been a great lens, but I want something a bit faster and sharper, the 70-200mm f/4L is second on my to-buy list, after a macbook.

What's your overall budget?

well, just as much as the L series lens is. i hear there both good, just pros and cons about both of them. yes the L series is sharper, but i don't want to be using a tripod for every shot i want to take with it. the IS on the 70-300mm is a really awesome feature, as i don't need a tripod for every shot.

 

[H2Ockey]

Tripod first.

For landscape and close-up/macro shots a tripod will do 10x more for your image sharpness than hand held pro-glass... not saying the better glass isn't better, because it is, but I've seen you're POD shots and you have many good ones, and some I would say would be great with a tripod. Heck look back at some of the threads about them, and Compuwar's challenge to only use a tripod for every shot for a week. It won't do much for the walk around low light candids but for nearly every other situation it is the best investment after a decent body and a decent lens.

*edit* geeze I even wrote all that before looking down a couple posts and seeing pharsiklia's newest thread...

 

[maddagascar]

Tripod first.

For landscape and close-up/macro shots a tripod will do 10x more for your image sharpness than hand held pro-glass... not saying the better glass isn't better, because it is, but I've seen you're POD shots and you have many good ones, and some I would say would be great with a tripod. Heck look back at some of the threads about them, and Compuwar's challenge to only use a tripod for every shot for a week. It won't do much for the walk around low light candids but for nearly every other situation it is the best investment after a decent body and a decent lens.

your right, soo i'll get a tripod for sure, and the one i chose is a good one right?

but what about the lens? what should i get??..such a big dilemma!

 

[H2Ockey]

your right, soo i'll get a tripod for sure, and the one i chose is a good one right?

but what about the lens? what should i get??..such a big dilemma!

I personally haven't done enough looking into all tripods to comment on that one. I myself have a very old steel manfrotto I got used from someone that did high end video. The saying that you can get a tripod that is:
Inexpensive
Sturdy
Lightweight
but you can only pick two, rings true with mine, got it used for $50, i'm not sure how much it weighs but it is a lot... I would have put it on a scale a long time ago but i'm a little afraid of the truth.

Anyway it is a tough lens question, personally I'd go 70-300 IS but that is me for me. Candid shots especially low light indoor like a casino SCREAM for the 50 1.4. As far as Macro shots you can get some really good results by hand-holding a reversed 50mm as well... well some can... not me so I can't speak for you either but i've seen some more that stunning shots with a reveresed 50mm and pop up flash.

For landscapes as I said tripod and the kit lens will go a very long ways but you may also find a use for the 50 (due it's sharpness at most all f/stops, or a 70-200 for the same reason). I'd say ask yourself what you want, I'm sure the kit lens is fine for landscapes especially if you get a tripod. You may want more reach and a 70-200 L or 20-300 IS would be great where their needed but you won't be able to do the indoor candids very well.

I guess i'd ask yourself what are you currently unhappy with the kit lens? Just over all sharpness? Get the tripod first and use it and ask teh lens question again in a month or so. Inability for indoor candid shots? 50mm 1.4 then. Reach? 70-300 IS.

 

[maddagascar]

I personally haven't done enough looking into all tripods to comment on that one. I myself have a very old steel manfrotto I got used from someone that did high end video. The saying that you can get a tripod that is:
Inexpensive
Sturdy
Lightweight
but you can only pick two, rings true with mine, got it used for $50, i'm not sure how much it weighs but it is a lot... I would have put it on a scale a long time ago but i'm a little afraid of the truth.

Anyway it is a tough lens question, personally I'd go 70-300 IS but that is me for me. Candid shots especially low light indoor like a casino SCREAM for the 50 1.4. As far as Macro shots you can get some really good results by hand-holding a reversed 50mm as well... well some can... not me so I can't speak for you either but i've seen some more that stunning shots with a reveresed 50mm and pop up flash.

For landscapes as I said tripod and the kit lens will go a very long ways but you may also find a use for the 50 (due it's sharpness at most all f/stops, or a 70-200 for the same reason). I'd say ask yourself what you want, I'm sure the kit lens is fine for landscapes especially if you get a tripod. You may want more reach and a 70-200 L or 20-300 IS would be great where their needed but you won't be able to do the indoor candids very well.

I guess i'd ask yourself what are you currently unhappy with the kit lens? Just over all sharpness? Get the tripod first and use it and ask teh lens question again in a month or so. Inability for indoor candid shots? 50mm 1.4 then. Reach? 70-300 IS.

such a tough choice!! your right, the candid shots would be perfect for the 50mm 1.4, it would be soooo perfect. i mean the lens kit does work just fine, probably just have to increase the shutter speed i have to eliminate a little blur. i would love the reach though at the same time...

but the 70-300IS is also great quality, but i haven't tried anything without IS, as my lens kit is an 18-55 IS.. sooo tough choice this is.

 

[kyzen]

i haven't tried anything without IS, as my lens kit is an 18-55 IS.. sooo tough choice this is.

So turn off IS on your lens and try it out for awhile.

People got by without IS for decades

 

[Edge100]

So turn off IS on your lens and try it out for awhile.

People got by without IS for decades

I would take a lens with top notch IQ (like the 70-200 f/4L) over one with decent IQ plus IS (like the 70-300 IS) any day. The 70-200L (any flavour) is absolutely stunning, and you will not regret buying one.

 

[apw100]

Which camera do you have? Full frame or cropped? If you are just getting into photography I would recommend either the Canon or Sigma 50mm f/1.4. A prime lens will force you to be more creative.

I have a 5D MkII and my "walk around" lens is the 24-70 f/2.8 L

 

[maddagascar]

Which camera do you have? Full frame or cropped? If you are just getting into photography I would recommend either the Canon or Sigma 50mm f/1.4. A prime lens will force you to be more creative.

I have a 5D MkII and my "walk around" lens is the 24-70 f/2.8 L

how do you know if it's a full frame or a cropped? is that what people mean when they say the photo is cropped 100% or xx%??..

i have a T1i..soo i'm not sure what i have.

but i do like the 50mm, i love the low F-stop on it. i hear there really sharp too.

 

[Designer Dale]

how do you know if it's a full frame or a cropped? is that what people mean when they say the photo is cropped 100% or xx%??..

i have a T1i..soo i'm not sure what i have.

but i do like the 50mm, i love the low F-stop on it. i hear there really sharp too.

You will see the terms Full Frame (FF) and Crop or Crop body a lot. It refers to the size of the sensor in the camera. A full frame camera has a sensor the same size as a frame of old fashioned 35mm film. A crop body camera like your Canon T1i has a sensor about 30 to 50% smaller. When you put a 50mm lens on a FF camera like a 5D, the light circle it produces covers the whole sensor. Put the same lens on a crop body camera and the light circle is larger than the sensor. The sensor sees a "cropped" part of the light circle. Hence the name. A 50mm on a crop body is like a 75mm on a full frame setup.

Dale

 

[silvrbullet]

Why not look at the Tamron 18-270 lens? It has VC (their version of IS) and gets really good reviews. My Dad just bought one, and the image quality is just as good as the good as the canon 70-300IS. The only downside is the AF isn't as quick as the Canon.

The 70-200 f/4L is a great lens, but doesnt have IS and doesnt have as much reach. It's also not weather sealed like other L series glass (if that matters to you).

It's all about trade offs, the Tamron is a great all around lens thats priced about the same as the Canons you are looking at. You just need to decide what you want in a new lens.

 

[Phrasikleia]

your right, soo i'll get a tripod for sure, and the one i chose is a good one right?

but what about the lens? what should i get??..such a big dilemma!

Any tripod is better than no tripod, I think. I went through a series of budget tripods, all of which had major problems, but all of which gave me sharper pictures and more creative freedom than I would have had without them.

The particular tripod you're considering is a budget tripod. It's rather short, so without extending the center column (which you really don't want to do), you're probably going to be stooping over to use the thing. Of course for low angles, you'll be be sitting down or squatting, but for higher angles, I've found that a short tripod is just backbreaking to use. The problem with taller tripods is that they are bulkier and heavier, so you have to ask yourself what your priorities are. Personally, I don't mind schlepping an extra pound and a slightly longer item around if it means I'll be without worries once I'm in the creative process itself. However, I know some people won't carry a tripod unless it's nearly pocket-sized, and even then they think hard about it before leaving the house.

Try to get the most tripod you can for your money. Look at the used sections of Adorama, B&H, and KEH. Look on Craigslist and eBay for good deals. Consider increasing your budget to get something you won't have to fight with every time you go out and something that won't fall apart in a few years. But whatever you do: definitely get a tripod.

 

[anthemus]

I concur you do need them all. Personally I just went from a Canon 50mm to a Sigma EX 30mm 1.4 for the price and a slightly wider shot. This is used mostly for my portrait style shoots and static shots. For on the go using a Sigma EX 18-50mm 2.8 EX. Gets me wide enough but still has some zoom. And for those random hikes I shoot with a Canon 70-200mm IS. I would say in order to have some freedom you need to have a variety of lenses.

My 2 cents.

 

[apw100]

Here is the most important question- What kind of photography will you be doing most often? The lens requirements for photographing birds will obviously be different than that of portraiture or "street" photography.

I do a lot of photojournalism and portraiture. 80% of the time I use a Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L on my 5D MkII. The other 20% of the time I use a Canon 50mm f/1.4.

My recommendation for you is the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 DG EX. I had that lens on my 40d, which like your camera, has an APS-C("cropped") sized sensor. It served me very well.
I would also get a Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens. The build quality is "plasticy", but its an amazing lens for $100.

 

[maddagascar]

Here is the most important question- What kind of photography will you be doing most often? The lens requirements for photographing birds will obviously be different than that of portraiture or "street" photography.

I do a lot of photojournalism and portraiture. 80% of the time I use a Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L on my 5D MkII. The other 20% of the time I use a Canon 50mm f/1.4.

My recommendation for you is the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 DG EX. I had that lens on my 40d, which like your camera, has an APS-C("cropped") sized sensor. It served me very well.
I would also get a Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens. The build quality is "plasticy", but its an amazing lens for $100.

i heard about the plasticy build quality..thats what turned me off from getting it..but for a 100 dollars, is it still a pretty good lens?

and right now i'm just going to get the tripod and work it out with my lens kit for now. i've been taking amazing shots, and will see how i do with a tripod, and if the 50mm 100$ is as good as you say it is, then i might give it a shot.

anyobdy have any input on it or the tripod i'll be getting?

 

[apw100]

i heard about the plasticy build quality..thats what turned me off from getting it..but for a 100 dollars, is it still a pretty good lens?

Its definitely worth it! Also, here is a recommendation for a tripod...
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/480309-REG/Manfrotto_190XPROB_804RC2_190XPROB_Tripod_Legs_Black_.html

 

[maddagascar]

Its definitely worth it! Also, here is a recommendation for a tripod...
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/480309-REG/Manfrotto_190XPROB_804RC2_190XPROB_Tripod_Legs_Black_.html

haha, sweeet. well i ordered my tripod.. i got the Manfrotto 190XB with a 496 RC2 head...

can anyone tell me if thats any good?

 

[AlaskaMoose]

Too late, now

But here it goes, anyways:

A nice but not expensive tripod: Manfrotto 055XPROB (~$185.00)

Head: Ball-head 488RCA (~$115.00)

 

[maddagascar]

Too late, now

But here it goes, anyways:

A nice but not expensive tripod: Manfrotto 055XPROB (~$185.00)

Head: Ball-head 488RCA (~$115.00)

well i can't spend that much money on it. it was actually a kit from B&H...

the 055XPROB is already almost near my whole kit!

but i'm pretty sure i'll be satisfied with it. i've been reading tons of reviews.


i was originally going to get the 7302, but wanted something a little bit more.

 

[maddagascar]

soo i might get the 50mm 1.4 lens tonight, but what do you all normally use a prime lens for? i mean i have a 18-55 lens kit, but is it really going to make a difference in picture quality, cause i can get to 50mm anyways with my lens kit. just want to make sure that a prime lens won't be a waste of money.

pro about it- i love that it has a lower F-stop, great for the candid pictures in places, small, lightweight.

i mean is it good for night photography too? i hear its really good for portrait photos also.......