I need to update my whole gear and I have a lot of questions.

LuanSOliveira

TPF Noob!
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
Hello, my name is Luan, I'm a 19 years old Brazilian.

My current gear is merely a Canon 1100D (Rebel T3) and the kit lens, a ISless 18-55mm. I want to buy a new short lens, a new long one, and I want to know if I should buy a new body to go with those. If I do, I'm getting a 6D cause I can't afford a 5D MkIII right now. And if I do buy that new body, I'll need a flash head too, so I need to know which one to buy.

When it comes to wide-anglers, I'm practically hell-bent on getting the 24-105 f/4L IS USM AF. The B&H deal that gets you a 6D and a 24-105 is highly seductive, but priorities are priorities. I think I might be more interested in getting a short and a long lens instead of a brand new body with a short lens. Have I got it the opposite way? Will those lenses work poorly on my cropped sensor?

I’ve also got the hots for the 24-70, which is 300 bucks more expensive than the 24-105. Are those 300 dollars worth it?

Talking about telephotos, I'm torn between the 70-200mm f/4L IS USM and the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (and it's luxurious L-series little brother). Are those extra millimetres necessary? And if we talk about spending over a grand, the 70-300 L is only a hundred bucks more expensive than the 70-200, but the latter has a fixed aperture. So, which is better?

If you should tell me to buy a new body, please say which flash head I should get. Keep in mind that I’m running low on budget, since I have all this other stuff to buy. I’m thinking 320EX, what with the tilting to the sides and stuff, but you tell me if the TTL on the 430EX is worth the extra bucks.

Finally, the painful question. I love the Canon software and the whole environment, but I’ve seen some amazing results come out of my friend’s Nikons, so, should I take my money the other side of town? Is there Nikon equipment that matches what I want, for a more affordable price, or for a similar price with better results?

I need to know what to buy and which should be my priority order. Also, I'm using B&H as a parameter for the prices. If these equipments can be found in other places for better deals, please let me know.

I like taking urban and landscape photos, and am pursuing a career in photojournalism.
 
Gas.

using tapatalk.
 
Really, what you need to answer is what LIMITS you with your current gear. Do you need a wider lens? One with a wider aperture? A walk-around lens, or ones for specific tasks? A body with better ISO capabilities? Answer some of those and that will help determine what gear to buy.

For me, my Nikon D7000 limits where this: poor-ish ISO performance, not FX (I wanted it for portrait work), no low-iso lower than 100, severely limited bracketing, poor viewfinder, no ten-pin connector, etc. The D800 fixed all of those issues and more, and that's why I upgraded.

To a point, I've read a lot of Canon shooters complaining about the robustness of the canon sensors, and how their Nikon counterparts seem to be significantly better. Canon hasn't really done much updating on their sensors in a while, and their dynamic-range and high-ISO capability seems severely limited when compared to Nikon's of a similar price-point/style. If you aren't too heavily invested in Canon, switching isn't too much of a problem.

Jake
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ido
Really, what you need to answer is what LIMITS you with your current gear. Do you need a wider lens? One with a wider aperture? A walk-around lens, or ones for specific tasks? A body with better ISO capabilities? Answer some of those and that will help determine what gear to buy.

For me, my Nikon D7000 limits where this: poor-ish ISO performance, not FX (I wanted it for portrait work), no low-iso lower than 100, severely limited bracketing, poor viewfinder, no ten-pin connector, etc. The D800 fixed all of those issues and more, and that's why I upgraded.

To a point, I've read a lot of Canon shooters complaining about the robustness of the canon sensors, and how their Nikon counterparts seem to be significantly better. Canon hasn't really done much updating on their sensors in a while, and their dynamic-range and high-ISO capability seems severely limited when compared to Nikon's of a similar price-point/style. If you aren't too heavily invested in Canon, switching isn't too much of a problem.

Jake

I need a telephoto lens, since I got none and I miss having one. I'm willing to settle for the f/4 versions of the lenses I've named instead of the f/2.8 cause I can't afford the latter, since I've got so much to buy. Walk-around lenses would be better, which is what attracts me to the f/4L version of the EF 70-200mm instead of the f/2.8 versions. My current body has a very poor ISO performance, and I need to know if buying new lenses alone would make that a little better, or if I need to buy a new body. I need to know if those EF lenses I mentioned will work in my cropped rebel t3 sensor any better than my EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, and if that will be good enough to let me wait till I get a little more moolah so I can buy that new body.
 
I've found the 70-200 2.8 lens on a FX body is... Awesome. I use it soooooooo often, more than most other lenses. It's such a good working lens, but not so much for a walk-around. Someone from the canon side will be able to guide you more succinctly, so I'll leave it at that. The 6D with a 24-105 might be real nice, but I know the 6D doesn't have the best high ISO performance. Hopefully @jsecordphoto can comment as he shoots with one at High ISO's all the time.

Jake
 
Gas.

using tapatalk.
What now?

An acronym for "Gear Acquisition Syndrome." Simply refers to the idea of " I want gear! But don't have a NEED for new gear! But... I WANT IT!"

Jake
oh. Well, as you said I feel very limited with my current gear, and I feel I need to evolve from this point. I am not going to buy the wide, the tele, the body and the flash all at once, but I've had this same gear for two years now and I need to move forward. So I'll sum it up real good for you:

I want to buy a tele lens. I could buy a EF 70-200mm F/4L IS, or a EF 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6 IS (or the L version of the latter, depending).
Or I could get the 24-105 or the 24-70, if the crop factor of my Rebel T3 made them into practical teles, and then they'd be good wide-angle when I buy the 6D.
 
What do you need high ISO for?
I don't need high ISO as much as I need a high ISO performance. From what I read on reviews it looks like the latest bodies take photos at 6400 with acceptable noise, which I don't get with my camera. I am hardly ever in situations when even at 6400 I can't get a shooting speed low enough to shoot handheld with my ISless lens, but when I do, the noise is just so frustrating...
 
What do you need high ISO for?
I don't need high ISO as much as I need a high ISO performance. From what I read on reviews it looks like the latest bodies take photos at 6400 with acceptable noise, which I don't get with my camera. I am hardly ever in situations when even at 6400 I can't get a shooting speed low enough to shoot handheld with my ISless lens, but when I do, the noise is just so frustrating...

I've shot completely useable and printable images at 120mm, f2.8, ISO 12800, and 1/20th of a second. Granted that was with a D800 and Tamron 70-200 2.8VC. But I KNOW a I couldn't have done that with my older D7000. Yeah, the newer (that's not even the newest iteration) kick some serious a**
 
Guys, I was set on buying a 24-105 f/4 or a 24-70 f/4 to use on my 1100D for the time being, then this guy posted this video



I don't know what to do anymore. The guys talks about megapixels, but I've heard people say that's kinda irrelevant. But I had no idea I should apply the crop factor to the aperture too?
 
I just defected from Canon (six- and seven-year-old bodies) to Pentax. The K-3 produces nice images through ISO 3200, acceptable images at ISO 6400, and has in-body stabilisation, so you don't need to spend extra on the stabilised versions of lenses. I also find the appearance of the digital noise on the Pentax is much nicer than that on my Canons; somewhat closer to the appearance of film grain.

Another big part of my reason for abandoning Canon instead of upgrading is disappointment that the dynamic range and colour depth of the sensors aren't improved in the recent Canons. They've done amazing things with fast focusing, burst rate, and video - but none of those things are relevant to my style of shooting.

By the way, I hired the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS last year to shoot a wedding, and the weight of the thing when you're using it for a whole day is excessive. That and - the temptation to shoot at f/2.8 just because you have f/2.8, and then having part of your subject(s) out of focus because of the shallow depth of field. For both those reasons, if I did it again I would have gone for the f/4. With that focal length though, I would certainly want IS unless I was expecting to use it on a monopod or tripod most of the time. However, different people have different needs and tastes, so that might not be true for someone else.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top