Canon 400d Which Lens
Posted 07 March 2007 - 02:11 PM
Many thanks to any one help.
Posted 18 March 2007 - 08:53 PM
I would tend to agree with Mark.
I used the 18-55mm lens for about two years, it is well capable of some great photos!
If you really want a bit more range and quality then I can recommend the EF-S 17-85mm. It is equivilent to the L-series lens and is great for portrait work.
Hope you get on well! Great camera!
Posted 22 March 2007 - 01:48 PM
Posted 23 March 2007 - 02:55 AM
I checked out the lense you are using most (the 28-135). I found one that has image stabilization and 3.5 is widest aperture. Costco sells it fror $420. Does this sound like yours?
I am super curious about this lens because I have been looking to upgrade, however, the lens I really want is $1200 (24-70 f 2.8).
My photography is very different from yours in that I shoot in an in home studio environment taking portrait style photos. Do you think this lens would work well in this scenario. I typically shoot with the 50mm 1.8 lens you mentioned above which I like because my aperture is normally around 2.5, 3.2+ when more people are in the shot. I love a blurry background.
My photography is purely a hobby for now. Some day I may branch out in a little side businesss, however, can't quit my day job if you know what I mean. Having said that, the $1200 lens would be a completely unjustifiable splurge - but.....sometimes I just can't resist! But, I digress...
$420 is something I can wrap my mind around, so I guess my question is, if you were shooting portrait style photography - would you use this lens or slap the 50mm on instead??
Thanks for your advice. I have been admiring your work for some time and appreciate and value your opinion
Posted 23 March 2007 - 05:13 AM
The reason I got the lens with the IS is that I have developed a very slight shake in recent years, and I needed the added stabilization when not using a tripod. If you shoot in a studio setting with your camera on a tripod, you won't need the IS. I'd say investigate third party lenses. Tamron is supposed to make a lens (forget the spread, but it's similar to the 28-135) that's highly praised by its user, but is actually cheaper than the Canon.
As with cameras, lenses come in so many varieties, you really do have to specialize it for your needs, and ignore others' needs. Myself, I haven't been sorry about getting my 28-135, but I have noticed myself over-trusting the IS sometimes, and not taking my time, thereby getting unnecessary shake.
Best of luck with the search.
Posted 23 March 2007 - 05:25 AM
I re-read what I wrote and realized I didn't actually address one of your questions. Yes, that one you mentioned that you can get at Costco, that is the same as I got. I got mine through Sears. It arrived in perfect working order. I amazed myself right away by taking hand held shots at 1/30 of a second that were sharper than my old 18-55 could do (I traded that one in with my 350 when I got my 400).
P.S. the price you quoted sounds great. I would use that lens with weddings because you can very quickly reframe in lots of perspectives.
Reply to this topic
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users