Equipment conundrum

[ajay_sparrling]

<p>This is probably a strange question, but I'm trying to add to my arsenal in the most useful way possible.. I've made a list of for the most part of what I have, now I'm trying to decide which direction I should move now.. I know lighting is one of the most important things in photography, but the 70-200 is possibly one of the more versatile lenses..</p>

<p>Just to get some outside opinions to help drive my decision. </p>

<p>-- Cameras --<br /> - Canon EOS 5D Mark II (Canon Battery Grip)<br /> - Canon EOS 60D (No Grip)<br /><br />-- Lenses --<br /> - Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM<br /> - Canon EF 17-40 f/4L USM<br /> - Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM<br /> - SIGMA 150-500 f/5-6.3 AF APO DG OS HSM<br /><br />-- Flashes -- <br /> - Canon 430ex II<br /><br />-- Additional --<br /> - 3 LP-E6 batteries<br /> - 2 Chargers<br /> - Off Camera TTL hot shoe cable<br /> - remote shutter release<br /> - tripod (cheapy) <br /><br />-----------------------The Conundrum--------------------------------<br /><br /> (1) Canon BG-E9 grip for the 60D<br /> (1) PocketWizard AC3 Zone Controller<br /> (3) PocketWizard FlexTT5's <br /> (1) Mini TT1<br /> (2) Additional 430ex II's <br /> (1) Sekonic L-308S Flashmate<br /> (1) Sanyo 1500 Eneloop AA precharged Rechargable 1900mAh 20pack<br /> (1) Maha PowerEx MH-c800S EightCell Smart Charger<br /> (1) Additional LP-E6 battery pack<br /> (1) Manfrotto 3 section aluminum tripod with QR ballhead<br /> (1) 60" White interior umbrella with removable black cover<br /> (1) 60" Gold interior umbrella<br /> (2) flashpoint pro 9.5' Air cushioned black lightstands<br /> (2) Universal Swivel holder - umbrella bracket with adjustable flash mount<br /><br /> --- OR ---<br /><br /> Canon EF 70-200mm IS f/2.8L Mark II<br /><br /><br />($2,500) budget.</p>

[don_baccus]

<p>If you buy the 70-200/2.8L you could sell the 100/2.8L and spend some of that several hundred dollars on lighting gear. Or you could keep the 100/2.8L and ask if you need the 2.8 version of the 70-200, as the f4 version is very sharp, nice and light, and a lot cheaper, leaving money left over for some of the lighting gear you're interested in. They also show up used fairly often.</p>

<p>Or look for a used 70-200/2.8L IS MK I ...</p>

<p>In other words, with some creativity maybe you can nibble on both ends of the candy bar while staying in your budget ...</p>

<p> </p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>What do you photograph?</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I'm not too sure that you need more equipment.<br>

When you really need something, the answer is usually pretty obvious, not something that requires a lot of thought.</p>

<p> </p>

[ajay_sparrling]

<p>In generally I am a freelance photographer.. I've done cars, 'elopements' at the beach, and a plethora of other things.. I try not to be consumed by a singular, but rather like to dabble in all things photogenic in nature.. Cars, planes, trains, still life, people, etc.. I do reasonably well, I just do not do reasonably well with decision making due to OCD and having to wait X amount of time for my next bout of fixing my gear addiction.. I do like the "nibble at both ends of the candy bar" suggestion, but I'm having a hard time cutting from that as well..</p>

 

[Matt Laur]

<p>OK then. Get a tripod. It will improve pretty much everything else on your list.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>"<em>I've done cars, 'elopements' at the beach, and a plethora of other things</em>.."</p>

<p>If you've done alll these things then you should know what equipment you need... why ask us ?</p>

[ajay_sparrling]

<p>Yeah.. Guess because the wife is giving me a budget and I'm weighing pros and cons.. Figured I would ask others to weigh in. As previously aforementioned by JDM, it's much less a 'need' and more so a 'want'.. But I suppose sarcastic facetiousness is welcome too.. ;) </p>

<p>Granted, I know it's a 'strange' question as I duly pointed out in the beginning.. I'll go to the local camera shop and spend hours there weighing these same questions.. However, seeing as I'm trying to 'save' money -- I don't necessarily have the camera shop personnel to help me with my decisions.. Thought I would ask a forum..</p>

[Matt Laur]

<blockquote>

<p>But I suppose sarcastic facetiousness is welcome too.. ;)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But I was serious! If you don't have a good tripod, that's the thing. But seriously consider whether you might want to orient it around eventually shooting video. If you're as restless as you sound, that <em>is</em> inevitable!</p>

[ajay_sparrling]

<p>Yeah, I have to agree with you.. I think I'm gonna grab all my list stuff; ultimately that makes me more portable when it comes to portraits in a variety of different conditions. <br>

Appreciate the feedback.. </p>

[acedigital]

<p>I would get an additional flash before worrying about Pocket Wizards etc. Unless you do a lot of indoor sports, the f4 version of the 70-200 might work as others pointed out.<br>

It IS a great lens - I have the older non-IS version of the canon 70-200 2.8, bought it used for under $1000 7 yrs ago and it's my best lens. Not sure I would spring for the latest version though.</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>Ajay, I'd go to the bank and set up a special savings account just for that $2500. Add to it with money from paid gigs. Use the funds to buy stuff it's obvious to you that you need. If you're simply asking how you can improve your photography with a $2500 budget, you're asking the wrong question.</p>

<p>What I think I'm understanding from what you write is that you want to explore small-flash lighting. If so, then maybe you should nibble in that direction. You can do that on a surprisingly small budget if you don't mind your rig being a bit kludgy. Work through the lighting 101 tutorial on the "strobist" blog for a whole lot of really great ideas in small flash lighting.</p>

<p>As for the 70-200/2.8 IS II, well... That's an outstanding lens, but I would hardly call it versatile. It's very large and heavy, so you won't want to spend a lot of time carrying/using it. It covers a relatively narrow focal length range (putting a premium on image quality), so it's not nearly as versatile as, say, a 1:10 hyperzoom -- or even a more typical 1:4 zoom. I have the 70-200/4 IS, and although it's a stunning lens, I use it entirely for candid portraiture. My 100/2 is often my lens of choice for formal portraiture, my 70-300 IS is my lens of choice for wildlife hikes, and my 24-105 is my lens of choice for general use. </p>

[JDMvW]

<blockquote>

<p>sarcastic facetiousness</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is not an attribute of a particular answer/comment, but rather a way of life for many of us. :|</p>

<p>It's like "operating room" humor - a way to deal with objective reality.</p>

[wayne_crider4]

<p>Take only the bare minimum when out. Don't over complicate the lighting. Forget the light stands; No umbrellas. You need a bounce, maybe a helper or enlist a family member that came along. Charge all batteries at home. Digital cameras, no handheld meter, the screen is your Polaroid. A couple of Wein slaves for off camera light pop's; Get another strobe. You could get a flash softener or piece of cloth. Get a warming filter for the flash. You'll barely need a tripod if you've got good stabilization and high ISO capabilities. Be able to move, explore angles and move people around.</p>