- This topic is empty.
what to go for????
-
Hi I have a 400D and a 350D with 18-55 kit lens (mid quality at best i know) and a 70-300 sigma..(is OK for sports at present).
I’m looking into doing portrait’s and a little with models and studio shots of motorcycles etc…
what in your valued opinion is the best all round lens to go for on a budget???
I’m looking for something to cover the gap between the lenses i already have till they start paying for themselves (i do a little bit with nightclubs and such)..thanks in advance :roll:
I would suggest something like the Tamron 28-75 f2.8. Go for something with a constant aperture, rather than one which has a varied aperture. (Varied aperture means the maximum lens aperture gets smaller as you zoom out eg x-y mm f/2.8-4.5 means 2.8 at x, and 4.5 at y.
I used the sigma 30mm 1.6 (might have been 1.8) for some home studio and portrait work and it gave me some of the sharpest images I have produced from my nikon d200.
I know they have a 50mm coming out, if I had the spare cash I would be buying it.
I think, that you already have the two good ‘all around lenses on a budget’. For portraits and studio photos the lighting is much more important than lens quality. You can shoot the motorcycles with the 18-55 and models with the 70-300.
If you look through these images, you will find that half of them were taken with very cheap equipment, even compact cameras. What makes some of them look good is the carefully planned lighting.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/strobist/poolZoltan
I’d agree that your current lens are suitable to begin portrait work, and I don’t think you really need to worry about filling any focal gaps in you lens selection, fortunately you can move the camera in and out rather than zooming.
I have two lens for portraits, a Sigma 75mm 2.8 (which is c. 100mm on my Canon) and a Canon 50mm 1.8. If you are keen on getting another lens for you camera, I’d suggest the Canon 1.8, which is about €140 I think I paid, is a nice addition and nicely suited to portraits and group shots.
The only point I would make other than that is that 100mm tends to be the most flattering focal length for portraits, or so I was led to believe when I was researching it, so if you are going to go into portraits in a big way, the Sigma would be a worthwhile purchase, although it does come with a €700 price tag.
Now, is it lense and lenses or lens and lens…..I’m going to wonder about that all day.
I have to second the suggestion that the lighting is crucial for quality.
When I first used an Elinchrom dlite2 kit for some product photography, I didn’t see the family for about a fortnight because I became obsessed with the quality I was getting out of my kit lens.
I would still add a nice prime lens to the lineup if the budget will stretch that far.
But certainly get some lights for a real jump in quality.Thanks all for your opinion’s :D
lighting is one thing i will definitely be sorting asap!!!
i just don’t want to be missing the quality on the lens!!!
I will certainly be looking into some of the suggestions above!!
if anybody has anything for sale that fits the bill PM me details :)BlackBlade wrote:
Thanks all for your opinion’s :D
lighting is one thing i will definitely be sorting asap!!!
i just don’t want to be missing the quality on the lens!!!
I will certainly be looking into some of the suggestions above!!
if anybody has anything for sale that fits the bill PM me details :)You are not misssing out on anything. Don’t read too many equipment reviews, take photos instead and concentrate on your technique… Those lenses on a 400d are almost as good as you can get, the remaining 10% image quality increase can wait until you know exactly what you are doing and know what lenses you need to improve your images.
thanks dude!!!
ye im snap happy :D have been for years but always learning :P
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
