My troubled mind .....

[wgp1987]

has me bouncing off the wall! Hey everybody~! Im coming into some cash from working two jobs 7 days a week and i think i want to invest in some new gear. My equipment consists of :

canon 24-105 f4 L
canon 50mm f1.8
nissin di622

I have been bouncing back in forth in my head (as usual) about what i want! When i had my 30d (now i have a 5d), i loved my 55-250is f4-5.6 and was my main lens other than my nifty fifty. Ugh, its even hard to word this in my head. Im not even sure i need a lens (dont judge me) so heres my synopsis!

Should i get a telephoto?

tamron 70-200 F2.8
or
canon 70-200 f4L

should i get a macro?

canon 100mm f2.8 is L
or
regular canon 100mm
or
tamron 90mm f2.8

Should i buy a 85mm prime since its equivelent to the crop factor my 50mm had on my old 30d?

Should i buy a super wide 17-40 f4L?

or what i have been thinking about doing, upgrading to the sigma 50mm f1.4 (or the canon counterpart?)

Im crazy, i know

I wish there was a camera doctor, but only i can prescribe the antidote ..... and its more cowbell, i mean glass!

Please let me know what you think? I dont shoot professionally (yet) and i have been shooting at a lot of really low light events that im mainly using my 50mm for and i would really love a 24-70 2.8 but i dont want to loose the versatility of my 24-105 and i know if i invested in the 24-70 id loose money on my lens, plus i dont have 1400 to spend.......... UGH, Im a confused man and i need everyones help!

 

[pbelarge]

What are you shooting when you go out with your 5D?

 

[wgp1987]

Mainly randomness, i haven't even truly "went shooting" with it. Im retarted, but recently since i work for an entertainment company i have been taking photos at our gigs. I seem to enjoy shooting macro also. I dont have the money now and im not sure how much ill actually have but i was thinking about possibly getting the more inexpenive canon or tamron macro and either a prime or a telephoto lens (if i have around a thousand) but if not ill have to decide on one lens and not sure what to do. I ramble, i know :/

 

[Derrel]

I'll take a shot at it. I own some of the same equipment you do, like the 5D and 24-105 L,and the Canon 50/1.4 EF,Tamron 90 macro, Canon 100 macro, and I have owned the 50/1.8 and I have shot the 70-200 f/4 L, the non-IS version. Whew...

So, for a 5D user, I would say: buy the 70-200 f/4-L, either the non-IS or the IS version. Money is safe in these--as good as US Government bonds.

Buy the Tamron 90mm macro over the Canon 100/2.8 USM or the 100/2.8 L-IS macro. Why? The Tamron 90 I own has beautiful bokeh, is light, affordable, and a proven design. The Canon 100 USM I own has average bokeh, sharp-sided OOF highlights, and is somewhat heavy. The 100mm L-macro is overpriced, and seems prone to optical decentering according to some people, like Lloyd Chambers; it might be a very difficult to produce optical design, or it might have some kind of weird assembly line difficulties, I do not know, but as it is, it doesn't seem like a very good value at this current date.

On the 50mm 1.4 lenses, the Canon is nice, the Sigma is probably a better lens.

The 24-70mm f/2.8....I dunno...I find this entire lens boring and humdrum....I've owned 28-70 and 28-80mm f/2.8 lenses....sold or got rid of all of them...dropping it down to 24mm on the wide end would not make much difference to me...I simply do not want a 44 to 48 ounce coffee can lens in this focal length range when a prime 24,28,35,50,or 85mm lens is smaller,lighter, and less obvious, as well as being one, or even as much as two f/stops faster than f/2.8.

So, your prescription will include: Canon 70-200 f/4, Tamron 90/2.8 macro, Canon 17-40L, Sigma 50/1.4.

 

[wgp1987]

There is a fine clarification. Im glad that someone is up late. i usually give up on threads because its always so late when i post them. I think i want the sigma first. As always, thank you!