Canon EOS 400D landscape and zoom portrait lenses...advice

freefall

freefall

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,379
Edit My Images
No
Hi everyone,

I am doing a thread search at the moment and wanted to ask for a bit of advice as well. I am looking for 2 new lenses.

1 for landscape photography
1 for portrait photography

The portrait one should have a decent zoom yet still be wide enough to get some decent shots. Plus I'm helping co shoot some weddings for friends in 2009 so if any are good for that type of photography then it will be great.

I'm really stuck with what to go for! I have a budget of £800 for both. I'm not bothered if I spend less on a decent lens as that will mean I can blow the rest down the pub.

There is so much choice out there and I just have no idea!!!

Will keep on searching the forums but thanks in advance guys.
 
For landscape I would be looking at the EF-S 10-22, Sigma 12-20 etc. I'm looking at both right now including a Tokina 11-16 f2.8. I'm buying used to keep the costs down. Roughly about 300- 360 for the Canon used.
A 17-40, 70-200 are what a lot of portrait togs use, (plus others) but their not cheap I'm afraid.

Forgot to mention. What body do you have? for some reason I presumed you had a canon with a 1x6 sensor.. Sorry

Ian
 
yeah the EFS 10-22 looks brilliant but a bit pricey!

I'm wondering if the 18-200mm or tamron 18-270mm are any good. they go wide but maybe not wide enough for landscapes
 
Thats the problem really. Good lenses cost money I'm afraid. Thats why I am going down the used market. There are some bargains to be had.
I don't know much about the 18-200 or the Tamron18- 270. Best really to do a search on here or check the reviews on various forums.
 
for your budget you will be struggeling to get a wide angle lens and glass fast enough for low light and have a decent zoom where you are not going to be in peoples faces!
 
To be honest I'm not too fussed about the portrait lens being too fast as if even I am taking any pics in low light I use flash so I think that is the lens that can lose a bit of the budget.

I live right on the doorstep of the yorkshire dales and have a bit of a passion for landscape photography so I think that I will want to go all out on an excellent wide angle lens.

there are soooo many to choose from!!!
 
My 2 pennith, Sigma 10-20mm & Sigma 105mm macro (Good portrait lens and great macro 'to boot' These are both quality lenses without the Canon price tag but if you can afford Canon they are the bees knees.

Paul
 
freefall said:
To be honest I'm not too fussed about the portrait lens being too fast as if even I am taking any pics in low light I use flash so I think that is the lens that can lose a bit of the budget.
Click to expand...

You should be worried about having fast glass, and ideally a constant maximum aperture of f/2.8 throughout the zoom range if you want to shoot weddings. I use the 17-55 f/2.8 IS and 70-200 f/2.8 IS and have just added three fast primes to my collection to cover me through the winter months when f/2.8 may not always be enough.

A flash is also needed but you may well not be allowed to use it during the service, making fast glass even more essential.

There's not only the matter of shutter speed and/or ISO to consider, but also creative control of shallow DOF and the benefits that f/2.8 and faster bring in terms of focus accuracy and speed.

Let's also not forget the benefits that IS brings for handholding at low shutter speeds.

This was shot at 200mm, 1/100, f/2.8, 800 ISO. The shutter speed was a stretch, not in terms of camera shake (I used a tripod), but subject movement/blur. If this was an f/4 or f/5.6 lens I would have had to push the ISO far higher than ideal.

20080829_142656_7885_LR.jpg
 
Oh no, this is going to make i really hard for me to decide now!

excellent shot there tim. I can see why you need fast glass now, especially at a wedding! You really captured a moment there!
 
I don't suppose this will help much then. This was shot at 40mm, 1/60, f/2.8, 1600 ISO and with flash. I needed the wide aperture, slow shutter and high ISO to capture the ambient light of the background, and just used the flash to add some pop to the subjects. I mostly shoot in manual exposure, which is why I need tht constant f/2.8 throughout the zoom range. I can't be fiddling about with exposure settings every time I zoom a bit and see the aperture value change with the zoom.

20080829_203256_3012_LR.jpg


Or there's this - same exposure settings (different wedding) but at 55mm....

20080816_204920_7156_LR.jpg


Here's one at 17mm, with the same exposure setting again. That constant f/2.8 really earns its keep...

20080829_201502_2924_LR.jpg



For landscape stuff I use the 17-55 but also have a 10-22. There's nothing quite like having the right tool for the job, but there is a cost attached.
 
I don't photograph weddings but I get to meet a lot of people who do, and what they say just backs up tdodd. For weddings you really do need fast lenses like the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and the 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS, and/or fast primes. But they're not cheap: buy those two new and you won't see much change from £2,000. Of course you can try to do it on the cheap - many people do - but if you're planning to act as a second shooter then I imagine the lead photographers will have opinions as to whether that's acceptable. ("We might not get the shot, but hey, we're cheap" might or might not be the message they're trying to convey.....)

I'm on more familiar ground when it comes to landscapes and I would strongly disagree with those who recommend lenses like the Sigma 10-20mm or Canon 10-22mm. I have the Canon and I love it for subjects like architectural interiors and narrow village streets, but not for landscapes. It's too wide. Those impressive mountains end up looking like tiny distant knobbles, and there's such a huge expanse of foreground that you have to resort to contrived and cliched compositions.

At the risk of sounding heretical, I'd suggest that your kit lens is all you need for landscapes. It's wide enough at 18mm, and when stopped down to f/8 it's sharp enough. What more do you need? Don't worry about the landscapes and spend your money on the portrait/wedding lenses.


(Or... Just hire the expensive lenses on the odd few occasions you need them, and spend the rest of your money down the pub. ;))
 
stewart, what would you recommend for landscapes?

Having thought about it I would rather get a much better landscape lens rather than portrait lens. Although I am helping a couple of mates with extra wedding photos I dont want their wedding costing me getting a decent lens for my landscape shots. Afterall I have a passion for landscape photography....well....a growing passion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top