newbie question again


efrancis

New Member
Apr 18, 2010
31
0
0
#1
Hello,

I'm here again posting a newbie question. My apologies for I tried to search some forums about this but wasn't able to find one.

Currently I have a 550d w/ 85mm f1.8.

I'm looking for a lens which is good for gatherings (party, wedding, get together, etc). I believe that 17-55 is the best for crop bodies like the one that I have but I'm looking for alternatives.

I'm currently choosing between EF16-35mm f/2.8L II USM or EF24mm f/1.4L II USM. These 2 lenses are not the same but I can't buy both..

the 16-35mm would be 25-56 on my crop body and the 24mm would be around 38mm. I've checked this link http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=739312

I was informed that prime lenses produces better quality than other lenses.

I'm a bit confused what to get. any input aside from 17-55 would be great.

thanks.
 

Atarandas

Senior Member
Aug 19, 2008
2,134
1
0
#2
The 16-35mm wide zoom will be more suitable if you plan to take alot of landscape wide and group pictures.
But both lens will not come cheap as you mentioned.

In terms of quality , I dont own both lens, so cant comment. But I would say that , unless you are shooting to earn your dough, the quality differences between the 2 lens would not be that materially important
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,644
63
48
lil red dot
#3
Hello,

I'm here again posting a newbie question. My apologies for I tried to search some forums about this but wasn't able to find one.

Currently I have a 550d w/ 85mm f1.8.

I'm looking for a lens which is good for gatherings (party, wedding, get together, etc). I believe that 17-55 is the best for crop bodies like the one that I have but I'm looking for alternatives.

I'm currently choosing between EF16-35mm f/2.8L II USM or EF24mm f/1.4L II USM. These 2 lenses are not the same but I can't buy both..

the 16-35mm would be 25-56 on my crop body and the 24mm would be around 38mm. I've checked this link http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=739312

I was informed that prime lenses produces better quality than other lenses.

I'm a bit confused what to get. any input aside from 17-55 would be great.

thanks.
I hope you understand how much 24/1.4 costs, in case you have not checked. It only realizes it full potential on a FF camera. Buying it for a 550D is a big waste of money. 16-35 is a UWA for a FF camera as well. On a 550D it would be a standard zoom with very limited range. With either choice, you will be paying a substantial amount of money and not using the lens in its intended way, and in the process, wasting your hard earned cash.

17-55 is your best choice, and the real alternatives are Tamron 17-50/2.8 or Sigma 15-50/2.8. Or you can just go for a Sigma 20mm/1.8 or 24/1.8 if you want to go the route of primes.
 

Last edited:
Jun 14, 2010
973
0
0
Admiralty
#4
I believe the 24-70 is good enough when you intend to move to ff next time.
 

AnsQ

New Member
Mar 21, 2006
1,012
2
0
Melbourne
www.flickr.com
#5
I think for gatherings, with a crop sensor, minimally you will need a 17mm on the wide end.

24mm on a crop sensor is not always wide enough from my experience.

While the 16-35 mk2 is a great lens, it costs about a thousand dollars more than the EF-S 17-55. And the 17-55 is more versatile in case you want to bring it for walkabouts.

Just my 2 cents.
 

wdEvA

Senior Member
Sep 1, 2006
6,284
0
36
etanphotography.com
#6
the 17-55 2.8 would be great for what you intend to shoot.
It covers the wider end as well as the tele end for indoor events

Don't let the L label tempt you into getting the 16-35L, you won't want the limited range and the difference in IQ might not be that significant.
but of cause the build is better on the L lens.
 

efrancis

New Member
Apr 18, 2010
31
0
0
#7
thanks for all the inputs.. i'll go for those lens only when i'm using a full-frame camera.

once again thanks for enlightening me.
 

An drew

Senior Member
May 27, 2005
3,920
9
38
#8
Since you have shortlisted 24LII you must have thought it is affordable and that the focal length acceptable on crop for you. If that is the case, then the 24LII is a good choice. It would also be great when you upgrade to FF.
 

ZerocoolAstra

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2008
9,522
0
0
rainy Singapore
#9
Since you have shortlisted 24LII you must have thought it is affordable and that the focal length acceptable on crop for you. If that is the case, then the 24LII is a good choice. It would also be great when you upgrade to FF.
I still feel it's a waste to use such an expensive lens on a crop camera... The focal length is sort of 'not here not there' for crop camera, in my opinion.

To me, it's like putting 19" BMW rims on a budget runabout, coz of plans to upgrade to BMW 'soon' :D
 

efrancis

New Member
Apr 18, 2010
31
0
0
#10
actually before I already plan to upgrade to a full frame...

i've checked some shops and the 5dm2 is still around 3k. and the rumors for 5dm3 is still lingering.. not sure how much would the 5dm2 drop incase the 5dm3 is release.
 

ZerocoolAstra

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2008
9,522
0
0
rainy Singapore
#11
actually before I already plan to upgrade to a full frame...

i've checked some shops and the 5dm2 is still around 3k. and the rumors for 5dm3 is still lingering.. not sure how much would the 5dm2 drop incase the 5dm3 is release.
everyone has 'plans' :D
I am also drooling over Nikon FX range, but I would consider myself foolish to plonk down >$2K (not sure exact pricing) now for the 'legendary' 14-24/2.8 which is pretty much ineffective as a UWA on a DX camera.
 

An drew

Senior Member
May 27, 2005
3,920
9
38
#12
I still feel it's a waste to use such an expensive lens on a crop camera...
actually before I already plan to upgrade to a full frame...
Agree, it would be a waste to use the 24L on crop. But if you are planning to go FF then okay. I had used the 35L on crop before going FF and the 24L would be even more useable on crop.
 

Top Bottom