Which lens would you get?

[brighteyesphotos]

Price not being an issue at this time (although I prefer less than $1,000), if you were to get a fixed focal length such as 50mm, 70mm, or 105mm, which one would you get?

Same with standard zoom, such as 28-70mm or some other zoom, which would you get?

I'm in the market to get two new lens provided the price is right and want to get faster lens. Also, who would you buy them from? I usually get my darkroom stuff from adorama but have not brought anything over $20 from them so I'm not sure how they are for the big ticket stuff. Would ebay be worthwhile? Can you recommend a seller that is legit on there?

Thanks!

 

[usayit]

I shot for a long time with the following focal lengths... 24, 50, 85, 135. Lately, I've been carrying 28, 35, 50.

By "standard" zoom are you referring for a general walk around lens. I found 70mm on the far end a little too short. I prefer to have a little over 100mm focal length for a general walk around lens.

Go ahead and feel comfortable using BHphoto.com and Adorama.com (use links on these forum). A LOT of people are happy with them.

 

[Jon0807]

if I had the choice and money I would go with the 50mm for the fixed. That's my definate favorite even when I was doing film. As for zoom I would get 70-200 but that may send you past $1000 alone.

I've used Ritzcamera.com, Adorama.com and BHphoto.com. I'd trust any of those. I don't think I'd go with ebay for any big ticket items due to grey market things that tend to sneak in

 

[JIP]

What system are you shooting that would help. Also a lens depends on what you like to shoot. Personally I think the 70-200 VR if you are a Nikon shooter the Canon version if you go that way is an excellent sharp and versatile lens.

 

[trollmannen]

By "standard" zoom are you referring for a general walk around lens.

Technically, when you are referring to a 'standard' zoom, you are talking about a lens that has a 50mm in the zoom range. So a 70 - 200 is not a standard zoom. This is most manufacturers definiton anyways.

 

[skieur]

Shooting mostly inside, I would consider 18mm to 70mm approx. at 2.8 for the wide angle end and 70mm to 200mm. 2.8 for the telephoto end. Outside I would go to 300mm, which still might be light enough to avoid a tripod. This would be for on location work.

skieur

 

[kundalini]

It would help if you named what brand (camera body) you are shooting as well as what type of shooting you prefer.

You can get good reviews for most lenses at Photozone.de.

 

[Antithesis]

As a walk-around lens for my nikon around a grand, I'd get a used 17-55 f2.8 DX.

 

[THORHAMMER]

id get a 35mm f1.2 for my 20D I could use it for many things. after that id pick up a 24 f1.4 and the 85 1.2.

 

[table1349]

id get a 35mm f1.2 for my 20D I could use it for many things. after that id pick up a 24 f1.4 and the 85 1.2.

Who makes a 35mm f1.2 for Canon? Sounds interesting.

 

[THORHAMMER]

Sorry, I goofed,

I meant 35mm f1.4, and 85mm F1.2


I guess that 1.2 was wishful thinking !!! lol

 

[table1349]

Sorry, I goofed,

I meant 35mm f1.4, and 85mm F1.2


I guess that 1.2 was wishful thinking !!! lol

Dang you had me excited. I love prime lenses and the 35 f1.4L is the next one on my list. Well that and the 400 f2.8L. A 35 f1.2, while not that much faster, would have a very interesting DOF to play with.


Subject distance 10 ft Depth of field Near limit 9.47 ft Far limit 10.6 ft Total 1.11 ft
In front of subject 0.53 ft (47%) Behind subject 0.59 ft (53%)

I'm digging that 1.11 foot DOF as that wide an aperture.