What should be my next lens?

00bolt

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I currently only have one lens (im an amateur). I generally take pictures of my kids, vacations, birthday parties, etc... I really like the speed of my 2.8, and would hate to go to anything slower... In fact, Id like to try something faster.

I was thinking of some prime lenses like:

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Lens
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Lens
Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Lens

any thoughts? Id love the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens but I cannot afford it. So any advice/thoughts on what lens would compliment my current lens?

Thanks
 
Well first of do you find yourself limited in reach with your current lens?
If not then go for the 50mm - as you are not needed to reach further

However I would be more inclined to extend the reach of a set - so eitehr the 85mm or 100mm - depends what you really want the lens to do (beisdes being fast of course ;))
 
ya I guess the 50mm is really out of the question. Not sure why I was considering it to be honest. Id like something with a little more reach. Guess its really between the 85 and 100. Since Iv never had 85 or 100 reach, im not sure how much "more" either is. Id hate to skip out on all that I would lose by going to 100. But then again, Id hate to buy 85 and it not be that big of a step up and wish I had gone 100.

make any sense?
 
Well 100mm would be a bigger gain in reach and if you were keen you could look to a 100mm macro by canon or sigma (105) - that would give you two lenses in one - a 100mm and a macro (which many have found a lot of fun!)
Its something to consider.

Of course it all depends - best thing is to try out a lens in a shop to get the feel for what 85 and 100mm look like one your camera - granted you can't get the full feel, but it will give you an idea of what to expect
 
ugggh, just when I thought I had it narrowed down you gotta go and throw another one in the mix. Thats actually a good idea.... hmmmm decisions decisions
 
just sit down and work 2 things out

1) how much you have to spend - and how long you are willing to save extra for if neeed

2) what you want the lens to do for you
That helps a lot with narrowing the field
 
I honestly don't think a 100mm glass will give you the reach you might be imagining. I personally wouldn't want a prime lens for something like that.. Just my opinion... Cause i would be kicking myself in the face if i couldn't frame the image up right due to not being able to back up enough or not being able to do so quick enough, and ended up missing the shot.
 
For "kids, vacations, birthday parties", the 17-55 is probably perfect.

For "kids and birthday parties", the 50mm may be "too long" if indoors.

If 70-200 f/2.8L IS is too much (it is expensive), you have three other flavors. I believe the non-IS is a little over $1K. The 70-200 f/4L is a little under $600 (have not checked in a while so may be higher). f/4L IS is around $1K also.

There is also Canon's 55-250 - range looks like a perfect fit for your 17-55. It's not f/2.8, but then you are not paying $1K for it either :)

For me, prime is not too useful - my kid/family (especially kid) never stay in one spot so I need zoom. I do have the 50 f/1.8 but got it primarily for it's wider apperture - eventually got flash which seem to be more useful then "fast lens" - I think my skill was not quite up to targeting at f/1.8 :) plus 50mm on a 30D is way too long especially with daughter charging.
 
I went through a collection of Canon glass and sold/traded until I found a set that I shot for years without any reservations.

24 f/1.4L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8 and 135 f/2L.

I was totally happy until I decided to head to another system. I have nothing but good memories/experiences with those 4 primes and would highly recommend it. When just roaming around, I'd carry just 2; either the 24 and 85 or 50 and 135.
 
How about a Tamron or Sigma 70-200 f/2.8?
 
well for what I 'plan' to do with the camera, a tripod really isnt practical. I just want to carry it around to different things and snap pictures. There may be that special occasion when I want that bridge at night with car headlights streaming... but my main reason is for kids, etc...

Because of this, Im hesitant to get anything too long without IS or too slow. Not to mention, one of the MAIN things that attracted me to SLR in the first place was the blurry background...

all that said, Im leaning towards the 80mm prime. I think it would give me some really cool bokeh, nice for fast action (kids sports), indoor situations, etc...

too bad they dont make a 16-200mm 1.4 L, IS lens for $500... Id be all over that one :lol:
 
well for what I 'plan' to do with the camera, a tripod really isnt practical. I just want to carry it around to different things and snap pictures. There may be that special occasion when I want that bridge at night with car headlights streaming... but my main reason is for kids, etc...

Because of this, Im hesitant to get anything too long without IS or too slow. Not to mention, one of the MAIN things that attracted me to SLR in the first place was the blurry background...

all that said, Im leaning towards the 80mm prime. I think it would give me some really cool bokeh, nice for fast action (kids sports), indoor situations, etc...

too bad they dont make a 16-200mm 1.4 L, IS lens for $500... Id be all over that one :lol:


Well, Try this... Set your 17-55mm to 55mm and walk around taking pictures like that to see if you are going to like being stuck at a long focal length.
 
I went down to a local camera shop with my camera and asked to try a few different lenses just to get a feel for them. It sounds as though you have an idea. It really depends on what you are doing with the camera
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top