Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Flossmoor, IL

    Looking for lens suggestions

    Looking for some commentary on how to better round out my collection of lenses to go with my 40D. My previous thread about the 40D at ISO 1600 and f/5.6 on my 28-135 has spurred this post. You can see from my signature what I currently have. Wishing now that I had held off on buying the 10-22 as I just haven't had the time to use it for the landscapes/architecture photos that I bought it for.

    Most of my shooting lately has been of my two daughters, 4 years old and 5 months old. Listed below are the activities that my oldest daughter is involved in for which I will be taking pictures. I am also listing what lens I think makes sense for the activity.

    Ballet (indoor poor light) - 135 L f/2
    Ice Skating (indoor avg light) - 135 L f/2 (currently using the 28-135 for it)
    Soccer (outsdoor - weather pending) - 135 L f/2 or 70-200 L f/4 or 100-400 L (might be better off getting the 70-200 f/4 plus a 1.4 extender)

    General Portraits/Candids - 50 f/1.8 or 135 L f/2 - either will work but I would need more room when using the 135 but it would give me more pop than the 50 f/1.8 would with regard to the wow factor for results.

    Looking for comments from the gallery based on what I shoot most listed above what lenses you would consider to give me the most coverage for the money.
    Canon 40D - Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L - Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L- Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II - Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L - Canon 430 EX II Speedlight

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2006
    New Jersey
    Anyone know how the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 performs in low light? Unless you're really set on getting a prime

    The Tamron version is also cheaper: http://www.adorama.com/TM70200EOS.html
    Last edited by FLiPMaRC; 04-29-2009 at 11:29 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Well, the 135mm 2.0 is a great lens but if you wanted to save a bit of money you could go with the 85mm 1.8.

    If you're looking at lenses like the 135mm 2.0 than don't even bother with the 50mm 1.8. You'll never use the thing if you have something like the 135.
    5D MK III, 50D, ELAN 7E, 17-40mm 4, Sigma 10mm 2.8 fisheye, 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 IS, 30mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 580 EX, 430 EX speedlight, Pocket wizard flex and mini.
    Canon G10

    Pentax P30, 50mm 2.0

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Kitchener, ONT, Canada
    We are in similar situations... my kids are 10, 8, 7 and they do similar activities. I'll go through my stuff and say how I use it.

    Sigma 18-50 f2.8 - General, all-around lens for at the park, in the house etc. Inside I'll use a 430ex flash too, usually bounced off the ceiling.

    Sigma 50-150 f2.8 - Soccer, baseball, portraits, hockey, whatever sports. With f2.8 and iso1600, I can shoot with reasonable shutter speeds indoors even in poor light. If at all possible, I add the flash too (at iso1600 and f2.8, an external flash is surprisingly powerful!) . Also, for kid sports, you can usually get very close to the action, so max mm isn't always required.

    Canon 50 f1.8. Really dark situations... or for portraits where I want max sharpness at f8. Around campfires and such...

    Sigma 10-20... Just when I want to make them look goofy, so not really for the kids. I did take a shot recently of their entire class play cast with it.. but the flash didn't cover the entire group so it didn't turn out. I'm learning....

    I hope that helps.
    My best pics on Flickr

    Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/garysimmons
    Like me on Facebook: facebook.com/GarySimmonsPhotography

    Gear: Canon 60D, Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX DC Macro, Sigma 50-150 f2.8 EX DC II, Canon 50 f1.8, Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC, Sigma 120-400 DG OS. 1 430EX, 1 430EXII, 1 580EXII, ST-E2, Manfrotto 190XPROB (soon to be replaced by the carbon version)
    Plus filters, wireless triggers and other junk...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2006
    New Jersey
    Found an archive thread on POTN for the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. Looks promising for low light.

    Last edited by FLiPMaRC; 04-29-2009 at 11:35 AM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Sort of between the 85 f1.8 and 135 f2 and forgiving on the wallet.

    Canon EF 100mm f/2 USM

    Got fairly good reviews over at FM.....

    Some low light samples can be found at...
    Last edited by Mark_48; 04-29-2009 at 11:57 AM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Formerly South Wales. Now South Carolina.
    I'd say stick with the Canon lenses. I have never found independent lenses to be free of problems.

    My old Tamron 70-300 took very sharp photos but suffered some fringing and very often was unusable because it kept throwing err99 on my cameras. It was not a matter of dirty contacts. I put that lens on my camera one day to take photos at a zoo - half way through, it threw an err99 having not been removed through the day. I had to switch the camera off and on several times to get it working again. Sometimes this did not solve the problem.

    My Tamron 17-35 performs badly on my XT but better on my 30D. My Tamron 28-75 does not focus consistently no matter what camera it's on. For example - I can mount it on a tripod-mounted camera. I aim it at a fixed point and it will focus in front, behind or on the subject with no consistency.

    In my film days I found Tamron was poor. Tamron's only selling point was the Adaptall2 system. Now I think they're expensive junk. Save your money and get Canon rather than something that you'll probably end up having to flog on ebay.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Raleigh, NC, USA
    70-200 f/2.8 non-IS might be worth it. It won't be quite as fast or sharp as the 135, but its quite close, and gives you a lot of versatility. Get the IS if you can, but soccer, ballet, and ice skating are all moving fast enough you will need a fast shutter speed anyway
    Jason Hamilton
    Selective Frame

    EOS 5D - Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM, EF 35 f/2, EF 50mm f/1.8 Mk II, EF 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 USM, EF 85mm f/1.8 USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro, Helios 44-2 58mm f/2 (with EOS adapter), 430EX, Canon S90
    Nikon FE - Nikkor 35mm f/2 AI'd, Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AI, Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AI, F to EF adapter, 2xVivitar 285, other lighting stuff
    Mamiya C220 - 80mm f/2.8

    Gear List flickr

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Dubai, UAE
    If the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 (or the 50-150 f2.8) is good in low light focusing I'd advice you to get that...pair it with 85mm f1.8 and I think you'll have quite a decent setup without going bankrupt!!!
    Nikon EM, Series E lenses 50mm f1.8|28mm f1.8|100mm f2.8, Sigma 80-200mm f4.5-5.6
    Minolta Riva 100AF, Sinpo PQ-3, Olympus mju-III wide 100, Yashica 635
    Sony cybershot W90, cybershot T90
    Canon A720i|400D|7D|5DMKII|85mm f1.8|24-105mm f4|135mm f2|40mm f2.8|430EX II*2|BG-E3|BG-E7
    Sigma 24mm f1.8|50mm f2.8|105mm f2.8 Samyang 8mm fisheye

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Formerly South Wales. Now South Carolina.
    This was taken with a 70-300 f4-5.6 IS at 300mm. These are pretty big birds - about as big as a small child. I had to get to within 20 feet to get this photo (it's uncropped). I'm wondering therefore whether a 70-200 is really what you need.

    If you fancy the 135 f2 then perhaps a 2x teleconverter or a 400mm lens?

    I quite fancy this lens (though it'd be overkill for your purposes) and the price while probably achievable with some sacrifices is a bit out of the way for a lens of such limited use. Super Telephoto 1200mm f/5.6L EF USM Autofocus Lens
    Last edited by Rhys; 04-29-2009 at 12:23 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts