What lenses to buy? (Beginner photojournalist)

[peter_s.1]

Hello,

I am in the process of buying a DLSR camera, and I picked up Canon EOS 350D. Now

my big dillema is, which lenses to choose. In the article "Building a Digital

SLR Camera System" linked from the main page of the photo.net, author recommends

that beginners should pick up either "Sigma 30/1.4 lens" or the "Canon 17-55/2.8

IS USM".

 

In my particular case, there are two issues: the first is, that I have rather

tight budget, so I can't spend more than $600 on the lenses. The second is, that

the "Sigma 30/1.4 lens" is not particulary usefull for me, since I will use my

camera for photojournalism most of the time. So more often than not, I will need

telephoto lenses to shoot up people's faces and details.

 

1.) Do you have any recommendation for me, what would be the good compromise for

beginner photojournalist?

 

2) What do you think about the following combination?

 

Sigma AF 17-70mm f/2,8-4,5 DC Macro

Sigma AF 70-300mm f/4-5,6 DG APO Macro

 

Thank you very much.

[rick_waldroup3]

Peter, I think you might be surprised at how much you might use that 30mm 1.4 lens. It is a nice lens, but barring that I think I would go with that Canon 17-55 zoom.

[jonj]

Tamron's 18-200mm is good for spot news but image quality is average.

It's compact and the price is no bad. I have used a 28-200 and 18-55 for most of my PJ work.

[craig_shearman1]

The standard telephoto zoom for Capitol Hill/White House shooters here in Washington is a 70-200 or 80-200 2.8. The standard wide zoom used to be 16-35 or so 2.8 with filmm but that's moved more to the 12-24 lenses unfortunately at f/4 to get the same coverage. You really don't want anything slower than 2.8 if you can help it -- in photojournalism you never know what conditions you're going to be in and anything else is just too slow. It's not just a matter of shooting wide open in low light. You need the extra speed both for accurate focusing and seeing through the viewfinder, not to mention being able to throw distracting backgrounds out of focus. The Sigma 30 would be a huge waste of money since it's a focal length easily covered by one of your zooms. Anything that's so dark you would make use of 1.4 is also so dark you would be shooting flash anyhow -- news work is more about guaranteeing that you come back with the shot than fancy available light technique.

[allgone]

Being a Nikon shooter, I can't really advise you on a make of lens. However, I would consider buying a used better quality lens than a new cheaper lens. You can save hundreds of dollars on great lenses. If you're not shooting any sports, I think the 17-55 2.8 would be a great investment for you. It's also a nice lens because it will force you to get closer to your subjects. It's very easy to shoot something from across the room with a 70-200 - it's shooting fish in a barrel. The 17-55 is good training to pull you into the action on an assignment. I think you're better off buying a lens you won't be replacing in a couple of years with an upgrade. Nice glass should last you a lifetime.

[firass_al_jundi]

I suggest a fast prime lens. Don't forget there is usually a 33% crop factor in dSLR cameras. A

nice 24mm f/2 or faster would be great. It's a nice angle, and a fast lens is a must. I shot a

few rolls of film the other day, at ISO 3200, and I know for a fact that if it wasn't for the f/2.0

I would NEVER have been able to shoot any. If possible go for something liek a 1.4 or 1.7.

 

If you want a set, then go for a 24mm prime and a 28-200mm. Try to get the fastest possible

with your budget. If you have to sacrifice one, I say sacrifice the zoom.

[a cukic]

I think that a couple of zoom lenses would do the trick, for PJ work. Fast primes (or any for that matter) won?t help you a lot because people you?ll be shooting will not wait for you to change a lens. If you plan to shoot sport, than a fast prime like a 300mm 2,8 is a must.

Like Craig said the most ideal PJ combo is 16-35 and 70-200. You could get a Canon 17-40 L and Sigma 70-200 2,8 which are not that expensive, but very good lenses. 17-40 is f4 but you can bump the ISO up a little bit.

[conrad_stoll1]

Canon 50 1.8 (for sure)

and

Canon 28-135 IS (or possibly the 17-40 f4 L if you want something wider)