alp_hizal

<p>Erwin,</p>

<p>I am planning to keep the f/4 and buy the 85mm f/1.8 and give it a try. This 85, is very attractive in terms of applications with a 1.6x body and I think i will use it frequently and have fun with that.</p>

<p>135 f/2 L is also an intersting and reputable lens, but it will take some time before i buy that lens. I want to play with my current gear for some time. The 200mm you mentioned is also a good one but maybe will go better with a 5D when i get one.</p>

<p>I also like to stick with Canon gear :)</p>

<p>I got permission from a pro photographer to take pictures for a wedding this December. This is quite exciting! That will be a good opportunity for me to develop some skills for this kind of photography.</p>

<p>If I can afford it by then I am planning to add the 14-70 f/4L to my kit. I will borrow a Rebel XTi body and use it with my 20D.<br>

Probably the 17-40 will be on my 20D and I will use the 85mm and/or 70-200 f/4 with the Rebel. 430EX II will find a place depending on the scene i guess.</p>

<p>Any recommendations on the wedding setup ? :)</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>Marc,</p>

<p>I was searching for 20D and wedding photography and saw this thread.</p>

<p>I really want to learn how to do that color correction on the backlit marquis sign. I use Lightroom and wonder if I can do it.</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses.</p>

<p>Nathan - I also want to keep my 1.6x Body next to a 5D.</p>

<p>Erwin - I think I will buy the 430 EX II first. I have to decide on which lens to buy first..</p>

<p>Additionally, no one posted any comments on primes! :)</p>

<p>I would also like to hear your recommendations on which primes to get for the long end to support 70 - 200 f/4.</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses.</p>

<p>Andy</p>

<p>This brings up the question will 40D be a good backup camera when I manage to buy a FF body? Like 1-2 years after today. Or stick with 20D and spend the money on glass as long as it clicks...</p>

<p>Erwin</p>

<p>As far as I understand from your response, my proposed lenses will pair good keeping in mind that i will move to FF some time..</p>

<p>Now new questions.</p>

<p>I feel like I will be going with 17 - 40 and 430 ex ii first. Then save some bucks for the 24-105.</p>

<p>When i look at BH`s website i can see they only have 24-105 as a "WhiteBox" item in stock. Anybody has any idea what does that mean?</p>

<p>Second question, do you have any experience that prices fall down after christmas? Shall i wait or buy what i need right now?</p>

<p>Thanks a bunch</p>

<p>My current kit is a 20D and EF-S 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS USM as a walkaround lens and EF 70-200 f/4 L for the long end.<br>

<br />I am using this setup since 2006 and I believe it is time to upgrade.<br>

<br />My priority is to buy the glass and flash first and then upgrade the body. However, your comments are very welcome at this point after you check my wish list for lenses.<br>

<br />I am planning to keep 20D as a second body and buy a used 5D mark 1 body, or buy a 40D / 50D to replace 20D to use it for a while with the new glass (say, until 5D mark ii hits the used market with a decent price tag compared to now)<br>

<br />I did a lot of reading about 40D/50D`s AF and it gives me the impression that they perform better than my 20D. Is it a good idea to spend some additional $1000 for a new body keeping in mind that I will use it for at least 1-2 years more before buying a 5d mk ii.<br>

<br />To give a better idea of my photography style,<br>

<br />I do not feel the need of really fast lenses at wide end, f/4 s will do good for me. I would like to hear some recommendations on which primes to add to the two lenses i listed below to use in low-light conditions for the wide end. (keeping in mind that i will wait a while before changing to FF)<br>

<br />Also, i am not into pixel peeping and do not really like comparing equipment for their extreme/on the edge performances. As far as I have seen/read all below lenses have good build quality and decent performance. My criteria is to buy glass that i can use for a long time and get the most of the creativity out of them.<br>

<br />For the long end, i prefer faster glass since i shoot interiors, races and live scenes. I am thinking of replacing my 70-200 f/4 with a f/2.8 some time but not before i buy other zooms and body, it will be my last move.<br>

<br />-----<br />Lenses<br />EF 17-40 f/4 USM L with EF 24-105 f/4 USM L IS<br />Flash<br />430 EX II<br />-----<br>

<br />The EF 16-35 f/2.8 L is an attractive lens but it seems better to buy the 17-40 and a fast prime for the wide end. What do you think?<br>

<br />Any other idea / pathway is very welcome since there is not a "all time best" combination.<br>

<br />Thanks a bunch!</p>

<p> </p>

Dear William,

thank you very much!

i actually think of buying a 5D after its new version pops out.. and use it for wide angle... as

a result wide lenses will have to wait for me to buy them :)

thank you all for this very kind and deep comments!

i think i'll buy the 70-200 f/4 non is in a week :)

then we'll discuss again

thanks a lot!

I would like to thank all of you very much!

I don't get this informational and good replies even in Turkish forums, and this soon :)

For wide coverage, actually i do not use wide lenses that much and probably will buy one

later :/

I think i decided to get the 85mm f/1.8 and 70-200 f/4 non-is.

But the zoom comes first! I'll keep the old 17-85 IS and buy the telezoom for this summer

:)

In my opinion, all 70-200 's by Canon are very versatile and good lenses in optical quality.

But we photographers must choose one that suits our style and fulfills our needs...

For indoor shooting at venues,bars etc... 50mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8 will do the job for

me,thanks to high ISO settings available here :)

Later comes the 100mm macro.

Tamron? Oh yes, i will buy it for sure, but not soon :)

A teleconverter? here comes a question, 1.4x or 2.0x ? not to compare their optical

quality, we all know...

Fast aperture--->1.4x, focal length ---> 2.0x

i'd go with the 1.4x

Again thanks for your kind comments!

Barbu,

since f/2.8 is much more expensive and i don't shoot at dim light very often, i want a telezoom for bright days :)

also its very very heavy!

Colin,

i looked at the sigma 10-20 dc, maybe that one...

thanks

nice recommendation...

since i don't care that much on bokeh quality, i think i will use an 70-200 f/4 to do such tight headwork...

and also buy the 85 f/1.8

maybe after a while i'll get to 100mm for macro shooting :)

again, thank you for your comments!

Dan,

if my language is a bit inpolite i am sorry about that, really.

i wrote that in hurry.

thanks.

Dear Dan,

I did extensive, deep and looong search on each of these lenses and can say that i am full of technical details from each one :)

I just wanted to acquire hands-on experience information from users...

Thank you.

Hi all,

My current gear only consists of an EOS 20D and Canon 17-85 IS USM.

I am planning to buy these lenses,

Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 SP

Canon 85mm f/1.8 or 100mm f/2.8

Canon 50mm f/1.8

Canon 70-200 f/4 IS L (not to soon, i think its price will drop)

If you have any of these lenses, can you please give some information based on;

* price/performance

* your experiences (good/bad:)

Thanks!

Bruce, thank you for your kind comments!

Actually i didn't spent enough time to compare 85's and 100's compression differences...

Can you say that the 100mm flattens your models faces? Or is there a major difference?

Since buying only the 100mm for macro+portrait will be a good buy for me but, i am not sure yet!

Thanks!

Hi all,

I've been looking for a portait prime lens for my EOS 20D and have ended up

with two lenses, one is the well known Canon EF 85 f/1.8 and the other is a

macro lens, the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro.

My question is that if i choose the 100mm, what will be the drawback(s) besides

the auto-focus inaccuracy at long focusing distances?

Does any of your use the 100mm for portraits, if you do can you please send me

a link to your related photos?

I like portraits and macro photography and want to know if i can do them all

with 100mm or buy two lenses :)

thanks!

Thanks to all who replied.

well, it seems that 70 - 200 f/4 is out of the list. (until sunny outdoor shots :)

So a 50/1.4 or 50/1.8 coupled with a 135/2 will do the trick for me, i think!

Still hard to decide between 135/2 and 200/2.8 but 135/2 sounds better for concert. maybe i'd go with 70 - 200 f/4 for 200mm end and shoot outside and crisp :)

Well, the fat f/2.8 suck more light than f/4. They both have IS. Both are "L"

glass. Both are weather sealed. f/4 IS is newer but doesnt come with tripod

ring etc. we all know these, right?

According to photozone reviews;

f/4 is clearly sharper than f/2.8 (MTF's)

f/4 s CA's are lower

Sample shots from various testers prove these results.

Only difference (as a plus) is f/2.8 is faster.

Here comes the question;

Why why why would someone buy 70 200 f/2.8 instead of a 135 f/2 or 200 f/2.8

with a 50 f/1.4 for concerts?

ok ok zoom = freedom but image quality?

Primes will cost more ok, but i think a set of good primes will outperform a

zoom. Am i wrong?

I'll cough out a big amount of cash for fast glass so i want to be sure...

Thanks for your time & answers.

Alp

After reading forums & reviews for a month or so, following lenses are candidates for my gig pack.

It would be nice to hear from those of you who used these lenses for concert photography.

Canon EF 135mm f/2 USM L

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 USM L (maybe too long?)

Canon EF 70 - 200mm f/4 IS USM L

I have a EOS 20D body. Any recommendations on combining one of these lenses with a 50mm, or 85mm

f/1.8?

My dilemma is that actually i cannot imagine if these lenses will be long/short on the field because i did

not have the chance to try one of these lenses above.

Thanks

Alp