Gear purchase help, I really hate to ask.

[Aze]

Hey guys I've got everyone's favorite question "what should I buy?" I really don't want to be asking but I'm currently stumped and can't pass up this opportunity. My wonderful wife has given me a gift of @ $500 for our anniversary to spend on gear. It's not every day she wants to be so generous So basically I don't want to waste this chance to expand my collection, but I don't want to insult her by not taking her gift. I also want to get the most bang for her buck.

My interests: Mainly portraiture, anything people related, I'm also getting interested in infant/children photography. Also automotive interests me. No macro, or wideangle stuff.

My gear: Canon 500D (T1i), Kit 18-55mm, "Nifty fifty" 1.8, CPL/ND/UV for both, Vivitar 285HV, wireless flash triggers, Reflector (5 in 1) and shoot through/reflected umbrella both with stands.

For my interests I'm not sure if I should get a new lens or more lighting equipment. I know I can add incrementally to the lighting setup as I need and thats why I'm thinking a lens would be a better choice. I can add a bit to the budget if I'd like. So, considering my main focus is people, portraiture, full body, etc.. what would be a good choice for my next addition?

One lens I'm considering is: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens 0345B002 B&H Photo Video

Thanks for helping a noob!

 

[Derrel]

A second Vivitsr 285HV and a way to trigger it would sure be nice, and pretty affordable. And yeah, a 70-300 stabilized zoom would be a nice addition. Very small, light-ish, useful.

 

[Malone]

I'm not a Canon person, but this lens got MUCH better reviews and it's close to the same price.

EDIT: My link isn't working =/ But yea, it's the one you've linked below.

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/196-canon-ef-70-200mm-f4-usm-l-is-test-report--review?start=2

 

[Aze]

Hey Derrel, I'm pretty happy with the Vivitar you recommended, I might just have to use some of my own cash to set up a second light source, I've already got a second receiver so I'm good there.

I'm also looking at this lens Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens 2578A002 B&H Photo Video

For my purposes I'm thinking it might make more sense to get a faster lens, and that the 200mm will do me fine and I won't need the 300mm. Is my logic correct? Would the 70-200 be a better choice for me?

 

[vtf]

For $600, a used 70x200mm L f4.0 off ebay and you can make some gorgeous shots of your wife out doors. Neither 70mm telephoto's will be great indoor portrait lenses tho, not enough room.

 

[tirediron]

I agree with Derrel's suggestions, and as well suggest looking at a good tripod (Manfrotto 190 Pro or similar).

 

[Aze]

For $600, a used 70x200mm L f4.0 off ebay and you can make some gorgeous shots of your wife out doors. Neither 70mm telephoto's will be great indoor portrait lenses tho, not enough room.

I'll have to look into the used options and see if its worth it over new. I'll definitely favor that lens over the 70-300. I've got my nifty-fifty for indoor and it is working quite well, its fast enough and I haven't had too much trouble with getting enough room to use it.

Tired: Yeah I totally forgot about my tripod, I've got a manfrotto, I don't think its a 190 but I'm pretty happy with it, thanks for the reminder.

 

[johnh2005]

I KNOW I am not great at this. But one of things I have been hearing a lot of good things about:

85mm f/1.8

Canon 85mm f/1.8 EF USM Autofocus Lens 2519A003 B&H Photo Video

Maybe someone else can recommend a better portrait lens but that is one that I hear come up a lot.

 

[Village Idiot]

Hey Derrel, I'm pretty happy with the Vivitar you recommended, I might just have to use some of my own cash to set up a second light source, I've already got a second receiver so I'm good there.

I'm also looking at this lens Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens 2578A002 B&H Photo Video

For my purposes I'm thinking it might make more sense to get a faster lens, and that the 200mm will do me fine and I won't need the 300mm. Is my logic correct? Would the 70-200 be a better choice for me?

The 70-200 f/4L is a great lens for the price. It is f/4, but it's extremely sharp and at longer focal lengths, you get a shallower DOF at smaller apertures than you would with a shorter focal length, so it's not terrible.

Another option, is the 85 f/1.8 and a shorter focal length prime like a 24mm or 35mm. You'll lose the 200mm on the long side, but you'll have lenses with wider maximum apertures. Either way, the 85 and the 70-200 are both great lenses. The 70-200 also has the Canon L white going for it.

 

[Aze]

So I noticed the 70-200 in my price range is not the IS version. I've seen a few IS on ebay going for about the same price as a new non IS lens, so that is one option. The other is to just forgo IS.

I understand the general rule of hand held vs shutter speed/focal length. Now does that change with the effective focal length of a lens? Seeing as I'm on a crop, the 200mm long end of the lens will be @320mm. Should I take that into account?

 

[Village Idiot]

IS can be a useful tool, but if you're spending that money, I'd look at the 70-200 f/2.8 non IS as a used sale. Wider aperture > IS almost anyday.

 

[Aze]

I would love to go f/2.8 but its definitely out of the budget. I saw a f/4 IS for @650 on ebay and it looked to be in great shape. I would only get the IS if it was a used one, in good condition for a great price.

 

[fokker]

IS can be a useful tool, but if you're spending that money, I'd look at the 70-200 f/2.8 non IS as a used sale. Wider aperture > IS almost anyday.

1 extra stop of aperture can't always make up for 3 stops of stabilization though. With the IS version you can shoot a sharp handheld portrait at 1/60s and 200mm comfortably, without IS @ 200mm you'd probably want to be on a tripod for anything under 1/200s. Plus, if you're stopped down a bit and shooting a bit slower you will get better lens sharpness and greater depth of field (not always desirable but sometimes quite necessary).

 

[vtf]

This is what I have found watching Ebay the past 2 months for the 70x200mm. These are the approximate prices I've seen.
1. Used 70x200mm f4 $550-650.
2. New 70x200mm f4 $675-750
3. Used 70x200mm f4 w/IS $1000-1200
4. New 70x200mm f4 w/IS $1400-1600
5. Used 70x200mm f2.8 $1000-1200
6. New 70x200mm f2.8 $1400-1600
7. Used 70x200mm f2.8 w/IS $1500-1700
8. New 70x200mm f2.8 w/IS $2200-2500

If you go with the f2.8 non IS (which is out of your price range) it is considerably larger and heavier than the f4. The f4 non IS is the smallest and lightest of all 4 versions and within reach. I would also agree with Derrel that another flash is helpfull and triggers etc.

 

[Village Idiot]

IS can be a useful tool, but if you're spending that money, I'd look at the 70-200 f/2.8 non IS as a used sale. Wider aperture > IS almost anyday.

1 extra stop of aperture can't always make up for 3 stops of stabilization though. With the IS version you can shoot a sharp handheld portrait at 1/60s and 200mm comfortably, without IS @ 200mm you'd probably want to be on a tripod for anything under 1/200s. Plus, if you're stopped down a bit and shooting a bit slower you will get better lens sharpness and greater depth of field (not always desirable but sometimes quite necessary).

And IS can't stop motion. That's why I'd take a wider apeture over IS any day.