Advice on Lens Buildup


Status
Not open for further replies.

bcad84

New Member
Aug 12, 2005
209
0
0
33
Choa Chu Kang
www.sweetcornz.net
#1
Anyone can advice me on how i can buildup my lens collection?

Is it ok with my following build? :dunno:

1) 17-40mm f/4L USM
2) 50mm f/1.8 II
3) 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM
 

n0d3

New Member
Feb 3, 2003
1,511
0
0
#2
A lot of people leave out one thing, what exactly do you shoot? I can tell you to buy this and that but if you end up don't using it whats the point?
 

Jul 17, 2005
2,504
0
0
33
Clementi
#3
i suggest u stay away from the 55-200mm. for the same money, u get a superior sigma 70-300mm APO DG Macro.

if you're not shooting as a professional, i'd suggest directing some money away from your wide angle lens to other lenses. your current setup, 17-40/4L + 50mm/1.8 + 55-200mm is around $1.6k assuming you buy all new.

for $1.6k, i can get a tokina 12-24mm for $800, a tamron 28-75mm for $600, and a 2nd hand sigma 70-300mm APO Macro Super II (older version) for $220. total $1.62k.

but then again, that's just me. :)
 

freecloud

New Member
Dec 9, 2005
215
0
0
#4
my suggestion:

second hand 17-40L , 50 mm/1.8, second hand 70-200/f4.
 

bcad84

New Member
Aug 12, 2005
209
0
0
33
Choa Chu Kang
www.sweetcornz.net
#5
n0d3 said:
A lot of people leave out one thing, what exactly do you shoot? I can tell you to buy this and that but if you end up don't using it whats the point?
Usually I do some landscape, absract and some nature photography.
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#6
bcad84 said:
Usually I do some landscape, absract and some nature photography.
I'm not a canon user, but going by your collection, it seems rather well suited for your purpose already. You may wish to improve on them by getting the faster lenses such as the f2.8 range.

Also you can consider getting a macro lens to complement your nature shooting kit. Or if you have the cash, go for a long fast lens for birding.
 

Ah Pao

Senior Member
Nov 7, 2003
1,663
0
36
Singapore
www.facebook.com
#7
Haha, I would just recommend BUY BUY BUY to your heart's content...then by the time you realise that you don't need so many lenses in your collection, you sell away those you don't need. Benefits people like me looking for cheap 2nd hand lenses as well as boosting the country's economy. :D

Since you don't know what you shoot most, consider getting the whole range of lenses to try out, if you have enough money. At the end of the day it's a win-win situation - you get to try out everything while others will benefit when you sell your unused lenses off.
 

XXX Boy

New Member
Jan 11, 2004
1,159
0
0
43
GEYLAND LOR 15 LO
#8
10 years ago, I am crazy buying many many lens just for the sake of 'covering all angles'.
But right now, I can feel that I am very stupid coz wasted alot of money.
Like wat all bros here said, buy only those that you required. It all depends on wat you shoot.
Right now, I only use 2 lenses, 50mm f2 and 90mm f2.8 most of the time.

Hope you can find your ideal lens soon, cheers!
 

Jul 17, 2005
2,504
0
0
33
Clementi
#9
XXX Boy said:
10 years ago, I am crazy buying many many lens just for the sake of 'covering all angles'.
But right now, I can feel that I am very stupid coz wasted alot of money.
Like wat all bros here said, buy only those that you required. It all depends on wat you shoot.
Right now, I only use 2 lenses, 50mm f2 and 90mm f2.8 most of the time.

Hope you can find your ideal lens soon, cheers!
:thumbsup: agree. i thought the same way too at the start. now i mostly use my tamron 28-75 on my 350D's 1.6x crop body. if you need a tele, just rent, or buy 2nd hand and sell again after your shooting needs are completed.
 

freecloud

New Member
Dec 9, 2005
215
0
0
#10
XXX Boy said:
10 years ago, I am crazy buying many many lens just for the sake of 'covering all angles'.
But right now, I can feel that I am very stupid coz wasted alot of money.
Like wat all bros here said, buy only those that you required. It all depends on wat you shoot.
Right now, I only use 2 lenses, 50mm f2 and 90mm f2.8 most of the time.

Hope you can find your ideal lens soon, cheers!
The thing is you will not know what equipments you require unless you try it out. For me, buying second hand lenses is good since you will not lose much money if you resale them.
 

JediForce4ever

Senior Member
Aug 16, 2005
3,157
0
0
Singapore, CanonGraphers.org
#11
bcad84 said:
Anyone can advice me on how i can buildup my lens collection?

Is it ok with my following build? :dunno:

1) 17-40mm f/4L USM
2) 50mm f/1.8 II
3) 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM
Ahhh..you back liao:D

what you need is a 70-200mmf2.8L:thumbsup:
 

Frijj

New Member
May 1, 2006
999
0
0
#12
XXX Boy said:
10 years ago, I am crazy buying many many lens just for the sake of 'covering all angles'.
But right now, I can feel that I am very stupid coz wasted alot of money.
Like wat all bros here said, buy only those that you required. It all depends on wat you shoot.
Right now, I only use 2 lenses, 50mm f2 and 90mm f2.8 most of the time.

Hope you can find your ideal lens soon, cheers!
Completely agree with XXX Boy.

What you can do is:
1) 17-40mm f/4L USM - new: $1140 (from Oracle) or $900 (second hand)
2) 50mm f/1.8 II - new: $138 or $90-100 (second hand)
3) Sigma 70-300 (either the APO Macro Super II or the newer DG macro) - get this 2nd hand - it's a nice lens, can get the Super II for abt $220 if u scout around or the newer DG one for about $280 (w/ warranty).

4) If you've got some spare cash, get a set of extension tubes (either the 25mm one or the set of 3), You can use these for macro shooting.

I wouldn't recommend the 70-200 f/2.8, not at this stage. It costs >$2K. That's a lot of money to put up if you're not sure if you'll use this focal length.

Personally, I use the 24-70 range most.

I'd recommend going on outings and trying out what ppl have and how extension tubes work etc. Then you can make a more educated decision.
 

bcad84

New Member
Aug 12, 2005
209
0
0
33
Choa Chu Kang
www.sweetcornz.net
#13
JediForce4ever said:
Ahhh..you back liao:D

what you need is a 70-200mmf2.8L:thumbsup:

Haha Yup I'm back after 1 mth like lost touch with everything haha...

70-200mm f2.8L, jus thought of brought other lens up for decision... =)
 

bcad84

New Member
Aug 12, 2005
209
0
0
33
Choa Chu Kang
www.sweetcornz.net
#14
Frijj said:
Completely agree with XXX Boy.

What you can do is:
1) 17-40mm f/4L USM - new: $1140 (from Oracle) or $900 (second hand)
2) 50mm f/1.8 II - new: $138 or $90-100 (second hand)
3) Sigma 70-300 (either the APO Macro Super II or the newer DG macro) - get this 2nd hand - it's a nice lens, can get the Super II for abt $220 if u scout around or the newer DG one for about $280 (w/ warranty).

4) If you've got some spare cash, get a set of extension tubes (either the 25mm one or the set of 3), You can use these for macro shooting.

I wouldn't recommend the 70-200 f/2.8, not at this stage. It costs >$2K. That's a lot of money to put up if you're not sure if you'll use this focal length.

Personally, I use the 24-70 range most.

I'd recommend going on outings and trying out what ppl have and how extension tubes work etc. Then you can make a more educated decision.

Thanks Frijj. Mostly of your comment r very helpful and really give me a clearer pic of how i shld build up my lens.

Thanks !
 

honda

New Member
Nov 30, 2004
558
0
0
#15
When u go out to shoot take note of what shots u missed because u didnt have a longer or wider lens. Most of the time u can make do with the lens u have. Of course sometimes we dont know what we miss because we dont have it n cant imagine- eg ultra wide angle or long tele.http://singaporephoto.blogspot.com
 

JediForce4ever

Senior Member
Aug 16, 2005
3,157
0
0
Singapore, CanonGraphers.org
#16
bcad84 said:
Haha Yup I'm back after 1 mth like lost touch with everything haha...

70-200mm f2.8L, jus thought of brought other lens up for decision... =)
after seeing your gallery, I woudl say that standard zooms and wideangles are the way to go for you.Then get a cheap but good tele like the Sigma.



just my newbie comments....pls dun flame me:embrass:
 

bcad84

New Member
Aug 12, 2005
209
0
0
33
Choa Chu Kang
www.sweetcornz.net
#17
JediForce4ever said:
after seeing your gallery, I woudl say that standard zooms and wideangles are the way to go for you.Then get a cheap but good tele like the Sigma.



just my newbie comments....pls dun flame me:embrass:

yaya planning to get the 135mm L lens first but need to save up then i'm going for a Sigma tele lens hehe...
 

Frijj

New Member
May 1, 2006
999
0
0
#18
bcad84 said:
yaya planning to get the 135mm L lens first but need to save up then i'm going for a Sigma tele lens hehe...
You've got to take note of the 135mm focal length and the fact that it's a prime.

With a 1.6x crop factor, you might find the 135mm is too long to use at home (indoors), but not long enough for nature and not wide enough for landscape.

Do note that the 1.6x crop factor does NOT magnify the image, it just means that you get a smaller field of view.

You'd be better off starting with the Sigma 70-300 APO Super II (or the DG Macro) and then get the 50mm to play around with a prime.

From there, you can decide to get the 135mm if you feel the length is really useful for you.
 

JediForce4ever

Senior Member
Aug 16, 2005
3,157
0
0
Singapore, CanonGraphers.org
#19
Frijj said:
You've got to take note of the 135mm focal length and the fact that it's a prime.

With a 1.6x crop factor, you might find the 135mm is too long to use at home (indoors), but not long enough for nature and not wide enough for landscape.

Do note that the 1.6x crop factor does NOT magnify the image, it just means that you get a smaller field of view.

You'd be better off starting with the Sigma 70-300 APO Super II (or the DG Macro) and then get the 50mm to play around with a prime.

From there, you can decide to get the 135mm if you feel the length is really useful for you.
he likes the bokeh:thumbsup: ;)
 

mephesto

New Member
Sep 14, 2005
490
0
0
#20
heh heh.... maybe... in that case, get the 80mm f/1.2 L.:lovegrin:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom