Help on 2.8 lenses for Canon.

[oskiper]

Hi!

I`m starting to save money for a couple of lenses and I need some help as I'm barely getting started in photography.

I do stage photography and my current lenses are a 18-55 EFS kit lens and a 55-250 also EFS.

I´m planning to switch to full frame and I have just the range I need because I do mainly close ups.

I´d like to find equivalents to the lenses I have but with an aperture of 2.8. Any thoughts?

The catch: I´m on a budget, I'm looking for an option that I can afford (the cheaper the better)

 

[DB_Cro]

There's no such thing as 2.8 lenses for FF "on a budget".
There are also different ranges, your 250mm is actually over 400mm so there's no way to get that
range on full frame without spending literally thousands.

2 most popular lenses for FF are 24-70 and 70-200.
Sigma and Tamron make 2.8 versions that are cheaper then Canon versions.
Sigma 70-200 is cheapest and rather good, their 24-70 is not that nice, but the Tamron 24-70 is.

Those two are over $2k and cover the range from 24 to 200mm, while you currently have a 29 to 400+ equivalent.

It's pointless going to FF just for the sake of having FF and then buying shitty lenses.

 

[JacaRanda]

Well the two lenses you have will not work on a full frame camera.
You really should state what your budget is, in order to get suggestions. Even without knowing, I would suggests going used on both the FF camera and whatever lenses you decide to get.

 

[oskiper]

Yeap, someone already told me EFS lenses cannot be used on a FF because they mess with the mirror right? Budget is missleading because I`m in Argentina and prices are very different, at this point in time I think I could get a new 70-200 2.8 from Sigma (to give you an idea on my budget) but I need to cover both ranges 18-55 and 55-250 or so. Anyway I'm saving money and I'm not at such a hurry.

 

[tirediron]

...you currently have a 29 to 400+ equivalent...

Just so that there's no confusion on the part of the OP: While your current lenses have a field of view equivalent to that of 29-400mm lenses on an FF body, you don't have the "magnification" offered by those lenses. In other words, your 55-250 will show you the same amount of the scene as a 400mm lens, the subjects in the frame will not be the same size. All the crop factor does is reduce your field of view.

 

[DB_Cro]

Yeap, someone already told me EFS lenses cannot be used on a FF because they mess with the mirror right? Budget is missleading because I`m in Argentina and prices are very different, at this point in time I think I could get a new 70-200 2.8 from Sigma (to give you an idea on my budget) but I need to cover both ranges 18-55 and 55-250 or so.

Anything above 200mm on FF and at F/2.8 is likely going to cost as much as a car over there.
Forget about that range.

Stick with the crop sensor body and get better lenses.
I've done the same thing, I photograph the same thing, and I got the Sigma 70-200 2.8 that I suggested and replaced my
18-55 with the Tamron 17-50 2.8.

 

[oskiper]

There's no such thing as 2.8 lenses for FF "on a budget".
There are also different ranges, your 250mm is actually over 400mm so there's no way to get that
range on full frame without spending literally thousands.

2 most popular lenses for FF are 24-70 and 70-200.
Sigma and Tamron make 2.8 versions that are cheaper then Canon versions.
Sigma 70-200 is cheapest and rather good, their 24-70 is not that nice, but the Tamron 24-70 is.

Those two are over $2k and cover the range from 24 to 200mm, while you currently have a 29 to 400+ equivalent.

It's pointless going to FF just for the sake of having FF and then buying shitty lenses.

Thanks! By "On a budget" I mean I need the best relation between price and quality as in my country prices are ridiculous. a 70-200 2.8 from Sigma is around 3.500-3.750 dollars to give you an idea.

 

[pixmedic]

Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 non-VC is ~$500 and is a great lens. (ive owned this lens) with VC its still under $1000.
original tamron 28-75 f/2.8 non-VC is another great lens (owned it too) and can be had for ~$300 ish.

 

[DB_Cro]

I'm in Croatia, everything is more expensive then in USA too.
Sigma's 70-200 2.8 is the cheapest 2.8 lens with stabilization in that focal range.
You might be able to find the original older canon 70-200 2.8 without stabilization but you're going to need it with that body you use.

 

[oskiper]

...you currently have a 29 to 400+ equivalent...

Just so that there's no confusion on the part of the OP: While your current lenses have a field of view equivalent to that of 29-400mm lenses on an FF body, you don't have the "magnification" offered by those lenses. In other words, your 55-250 will show you the same amount of the scene as a 400mm lens, the subjects in the frame will not be the same size. All the crop factor does is reduce your field of view.

I understand, I don´t have a problem on that matter because I can get closer to the stage to compensate (and I can crop more on a FF without losing quality at high ISO's, on my current situation I can´t almost crop because the noise becomes unbearable). What I need is to be able to get detail close-ups from somewhere in between first and 5th row of a theatre.

 

[DB_Cro]

Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 non-VC is ~$500 and is a great lens. (ive owned this lens) with VC its still under $1000.
original tamron 28-75 f/2.8 non-VC is another great lens (owned it too) and can be had for ~$300 ish.

Tamron is likely much more expensive there.
It's almost $2k here in EU.

 

[oskiper]

Yeap, someone already told me EFS lenses cannot be used on a FF because they mess with the mirror right? Budget is missleading because I`m in Argentina and prices are very different, at this point in time I think I could get a new 70-200 2.8 from Sigma (to give you an idea on my budget) but I need to cover both ranges 18-55 and 55-250 or so.

Anything above 200mm on FF and at F/2.8 is likely going to cost as much as a car over there.
Forget about that range.

Stick with the crop sensor body and get better lenses.
I've done the same thing, I photograph the same thing, and I got the Sigma 70-200 2.8 that I suggested and replaced my
18-55 with the Tamron 17-50 2.8.

Now THAT`s a great piece of advice... Thanks! is not a bad idea at all... By private messages I`d like to ask you about APS cameras... I`d like to read your opinion on 7Ds

 

[DB_Cro]

...you currently have a 29 to 400+ equivalent...

I understand, I don´t have a problem on that matter because I can get closer to the stage to compensate (and I can crop more on a FF without losing quality at high ISO's, on my current situation I can´t almost crop because the noise becomes unbearable).

Actually, higher density (higher mpix count) crop sensor bodies are better for a lot of cropping then the FF stuff.
That's why sport and bird shooters use the crop sensor stuff.

FF will be better if you can fill the frame as it is without cropping.
If you can't, you're likely to have better results cropping the crop images since you have to crop a lot less if nothing else.
It's not that simple.

 

[oskiper]

I'm in Croatia, everything is more expensive then in USA too.
Sigma's 70-200 2.8 is the cheapest 2.8 lens with stabilization in that focal range.
You might be able to find the original older canon 70-200 2.8 without stabilization but you're going to need it with that body you use.

I`m also planning to switch bodies...

 

[DB_Cro]

Yeap, someone already told me EFS lenses cannot be used on a FF because they mess with the mirror right? Budget is missleading because I`m in Argentina and prices are very different, at this point in time I think I could get a new 70-200 2.8 from Sigma (to give you an idea on my budget) but I need to cover both ranges 18-55 and 55-250 or so.

Anything above 200mm on FF and at F/2.8 is likely going to cost as much as a car over there.
Forget about that range.

Stick with the crop sensor body and get better lenses.
I've done the same thing, I photograph the same thing, and I got the Sigma 70-200 2.8 that I suggested and replaced my
18-55 with the Tamron 17-50 2.8.

Now THAT`s a great piece of advice... Thanks! is not a bad idea at all... By private messages I`d like to ask you about APS cameras... I`d like to read your opinion on 7Ds

Read ANY review of ANY 18mpix Canon, T2i-T5i (550D-700D), 1200D, 60D, 7D, they all share the same sensor and 7D has the best autofocus/speed.
These are the most common Canon sensors out there so images are all over the place.

Check my Flickr link in the description for sample images, I've been shooting one of them for 5 years and recently got 3 new lenses (11-20, 17-50 and 70-200, all 2.8).
It's a HUGE step up from lenses you're currently using.