lens recommendation

[brighteyesphotos]

Let's say you were in the market for a new lens. You do mostly weddings and portraits with fine art and commerical work thrown in. You already have the standard kit lens and a 28-300 3.5-6.3 Sigma lens. What would you get next? Oh, and you have a Sony Alpha.

I want something with 1.4 or 2.8/F at least. I don't want a major zoom (yet, the one I've been eyeing is $1500). What would you get?

Price range is up to $300 unless I can get a couple more paying shoots or sell a couple prints.

[TPF Sponsor]

[Sw1tchFX]

$300 isn't gonna get you jack. i'd be looking into 28-70 f/2.8's and 80-200 f/2.8's. Or really fast primes. Nikon makes a 200mm f/2 VR, does minolta have something like that?

[Don Simon]

If you want a fast zoom for that price, your choices are pretty limited. As Sw1tchFX suggested, you might be able to get a 28-70 f/2.8 from Sigma, Tamron or Tokina (or if you buy used you might get a 24-70mm for around $300). Otherwise you're looking at a Konica-Minolta 50mm f/1.7 or f/1.4, and Sigma for other primes in this price range.

[Big Mike]

24 or 28mm to 70mm is an odd focal length on 'crop factor' cameras. I would suggest the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 or the Tamron 17-50 F2.8.

If weddings is what you want to shoot...$300 is much to small of a budget.

[brighteyesphotos]

I just said I do NOT want a zoom! I asked what would you get next? I already have a zoom. I do not need one right now.

I asked which lens would you get next? ANY lens? Mike, your answer is the only one that is remotely helpful.

Which lens for my measly budget would be the best one to get? And NO zoom is not needed.

[TheOtherBob]

Sorry, but actually what you said was that you didn't want a "major zoom." I'm not sure I know what that means - I guess you're now clarifying that it means you don't want any zoom whatsoever, but I think others interpreted it as not wanting a super-telephoto zoom (i.e. a really big, major zoom). That's certainly how I read it, so I personally wouldn't jump on people for misunderstanding your question.

In any event, the other posters are right - for $300, even a fast prime can be a tall order. But the best advice I can offer is that you should think about the focal length you shoot at most, and then look for a prime at that length. You probably know your own shooting needs better than anyone else here.

[Mike_E]

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Autofocus.html

Looks as though this is your only choice. F1.4 for low light, short telephoto for portraits and will work at the reception too. $309.95

mike

[Don Simon]

I just said I do NOT want a zoom! I asked what would you get next? I already have a zoom. I do not need one right now.

I asked which lens would you get next? ANY lens? Mike, your answer is the only one that is remotely helpful.

Which lens for my measly budget would be the best one to get? And NO zoom is not needed.

You said you didn't want a major zoom, not that you didn't want a zoom. Fast zooms are often used for weddings. Therefore we all said you won't get much in the way of zooms for $300. Not having a heck of a lot to go on and thinking you might want to consider primes as well, I also suggested a Konica-Minolta 50mm f/1.7 or f/1.4 or to look at what primes Sigma offers. I'm sorry if that wasn't remotely helpful.

[JIP]

If you only have $300 I say save you money or sell that 28-300 it has no busib=ness at a wedding anyway if you have the kit lens up to a 3oo your next step for weddings is to move up to 2.8 lenses. the best selection has already been listed 18-55 2.8 28-70 2.8 70-200 2.8vr if you want lenses fro shooting weddings this is the place to start.