A Photographers Kit

[Latham]

I was wondering what everyone's "ideal" lense kit/quiver is. I want to build my own but I don't know exactly what I should be getting. At the moment I have the standard canon 18-55mm and the canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6. I want to replace my 18-55mm reasonably soon. What should I be buying next? Should I decide what type of photography I want to shoot before I start spending hard earned cash on more lenses?

Just list your lense kit and say why you have those specific lenses! :) would be very much appreciated :)

[jackinavox]

you really should think about what type of photography you want to do to guide your decision on what lenses to buy.

my lens kit:
17-40mm - for wide angle and closed spaces work, doubles as my landscape lens
50mm - for portraits and head shots
70-200mm - for zoom work and portraits (generally not long enough for action sports though)

[Kazeden]

It is very important to know what you will be shooting the most before you starting buying new lens. For example i bought a tokina 11-16mm f2.8 thinking that i'll do lots of landscapes but in the past one year that lens has only been out of the bag a handful of times. It costs over $1000, now i am thinking of selling it. I find myself using my wide zoom and my tele most oftten. I have a tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and a 70-300mm. The tamron is cheap and if you are not doing photoshoot for money i think the images it produces are good enough. The f2.8 gives me more room to play with my light.

[Lazlo Woodbine]

I agree, it's very important to know what you're shooting before splashing out on kit. Most of us have probably been guilty of it at some point though.

Part of my photography kit is for business and part for fun so I spend as much as I can afford on the equipment I use for work and setle for whatever bargain I can find for the stuff which is more of a hobby.

For weddings I have pretty much the standard kit. Two D700s, a 24-70 and 70-200 and two SB900s, and a 50mm 1.4. Oh and a Fuji S5 as a backup body. I'd hate to use anything else for weddings as everything moves so quickly and the equipment needs to be able to keep up. The focus speed of the Nikon 24-70 2.8 is just phenominal and image quality so good that the 50 hardly ever comes out of the bag. The 70-200 is almost as good too. I don't use it as much as the 24-70 and it's a heavy thing to lug around all day but the flexibility is vital at weddings. The D700s ability to cope with high ISOs means that low light is rarely a problem, and the SB900s give a huge amount of flexibility with lighting. The 50 is still useful for when no flash is allowed or I just want a very shallow depth of field but 90% of the use I get from it is just for personal stuff when I don't want to carry a huge lens around with me. Fantastic for taking snaps of friends. :)

I also have a Sigma 105mm for Macro stuff which I rarely do, and a Sigma 15-30 for when I want to go wide. Not the top of the range lenses in their classes but still good enough to do what I use them for. I'd quite like to start doing some wildlife photography in my spare time so I'm sure I'll eventually pick up something like a Sigma 150-500 to cover that though I may be in for a long wait for that. There's always been something more useful to buy when I've had the money.

So yeah, everything I've bought was carefully planned and budgeted according to what it would be used for.

[Latham]

ok. i guess ill plan and put some decent thought into what I want to do. Do you think I should get a 50mm no matter what I do? I was thinking of getting the 50mm f1.4

[jackinavox]

can never go wrong with a nifty fifty :)

[Lazlo Woodbine]

If you're planning on doing portraits then you can't do better for the money. I was perfectly happy with a 1.8 to be honest, though if it's going to be a lens you get a lot of use out of then it's certainly worth considering buying the slightly better 1.4.

A friend of mine swears by his Sigma 50 1.4 so you might want to take a look at one of those too.

[jackinavox]

yeah the sigma 50 1.4 gets great reviews. it's slightly more expensive than the canon/nikon equivalent and waaay larger/heavier too.

[Redal]

As others have said, decide what you want to shoot first before buying.
A general rule is buy fast glass.

I got my first digital camera about 6 years ago, i wanted to capture my kids playing sport, i have slowly built up my kit, then had it all stolen, and have almost got it to where i want it.

My lenses

-Sigma 15mm Fisheye , i thought id use it more than i do, but gives a different view of things, i would have sold it by now, but i dropped it and it only works wide open reliably.
-Canon 300mmf2.8 , this is such a great lens, super fast focus,super sharp, the last one id let go.I have used it for Basketball, rugby,soccer,cricket,softball, portraits and almost anything. and loves a 1.4 tele converter.
50mm1.4 and 85mmf1.8 both great for low light action and portraits. If i had to choose one it would be the 85.
-100mmf2.8 macro, an excellent lens for macro and better with tubes(even homemade ones), focus is slow. As with all macro lenses it is tack sharp.
-17-40mmf4 , it does everything, landscapes, sports , portraits . My copy is a little soft in one corner when used on a full frame body. I dont hold it against the lens, i know it does it so i work around it, and for the price very hard to beat.
-Tamron 28-75mmf2.8, has a great range, sharp, light. Focus is accurate but slow, very slow compared to any of my Canon lenses except for the macro.

If i was going to get a lens it would probably be a 70-200mmf2.8

[Latham]

Cheers for the replies guys. Obviously general consensus is to put thought into lense choice. Now the question is should I buy a 85mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.4???

[Lazlo Woodbine]

Remember that if you have a camera with a cropped sensor that 50mm will become 75mm and 85mm will be about 128mm, which is going to be very tight if you're shooting in a small space.

Do you use the long end of your kit lens or the short end of your 70-300 more often?

[jackinavox]

Cheers for the replies guys. Obviously general consensus is to put thought into lense choice. Now the question is should I buy a 85mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.4???

I see you shoot canons! :cool:

I have both the 50 1.4 and 85 1.8. I gotta say the 50 gets more use and better consistent result. I do find the 85 focuses faster. As already mentioned on a crop body the 85 is quite long which makes it challenging to use in tight spaces (around people).

Another vote for the 17-40 f4L if you can go for an L lens this is an ideal first choice, i've used it for portraits and landscapes. what a beautiful lens.

[Wellzy6]

Another vote for the 17-40. I got one last year and I love it. Good value for money too.

Cheers Tony

[in2fx]

You really do need to have an idea of what you want to photograph before you start spending heaps of money.
Check all of the photos that you have already taken to see what your most used focal range is to help guide your choice.
Are you looking at portrait, wildlife, macro, landscape or something else ? this is what you need an idea of to decide what you might need or want.
I use a few lenses (all canon) for different reasons..... on a crop sensor
10-22 f/3.5-4.5 for wide landscape,
50mm f/1.8 for portrait and fun stuff,
100 f/2.8 macro for portrait and macro,
24-105 f/4 for general walk-around, pets, portrait and night shots,
70-200 f/2.8 for sports, portrait and wildlife (adding 2x when wanting extra reach),
18-200 f/3.5-5.6 for general walk-around when I want a wide range of focal lengths but only carry the body with just one lens.

[Latham]

@ lazlo woodbine - i have a 550d so as you stated my focal lengths would increase. I tend to use my short end of the 70-300 more. That is also partly for crispness and quality of a photo compared to my kit lense.

The 17-40 sounds like a go...apart from the fact i dont have enough cash. Its just sitting beyond my reach! I am only 17 and i spend all the money i ever get out of my holiday job on camera gear :). I only have a holiday job, not part time the whole year. Are there any cheaper options that still have great quality? Im also in the market for a tripod. One that extends around 1.5m and can hold my 550d with lense etc. Nothing too expensive please :). Im a big spender considering my income, i just love photography too much!!!!!

[Wellzy6]

Hi again.

Based on what you have just said above, a 50mm 1.8 (around $160-$180) would give you a lot of pleasure. 2nd choice a 60mm 2.8 Macro (seen them on Trademe for less than $500) would serve as a portrait lens at a pinch and is also not too shabby as a macro lens.

Cheers Tony

[Latham]

a 50mm 1.8 would be the largely cheaper choice but I do enjoy quality and often buy things that will last the test of time. Even though I am a beginner I do think it is still worth getting better quality gear.

[in2fx]

I too enjoy quality, but the bang for buck 50 f/1.8 is just too good and is nice and sharp as well.
Both the 1.4 and 1.2 L are known to have motor problems but have not heard of that happening with the plastic 1.8 and if you damage it, it only cost a few bucks.
I had quite a play with both the 1.4 and the 1.8 while trying to justify the extra dollars and could not see the extra worth in the 1.4 and after getting used to the fiddly focus ring on the 1.8, I have so much fun with it and have been very happy with it capturing nice portrait images at a model shoot :)

[Lazlo Woodbine]

You're going to get your money's worth from either the 50 or the 85. I'd usually say get the focal length you use the most which would be the 85 in your case, but since that's largely down to image quality of your current lenses then you're probably better off getting the 50. The 85 focal length can be covered by yout 70-300 in a pinch. Granted, it's not quite the same but you still get more flexibility this way.

[Redal]

Seeing you have a 550d, id go for the 50mmf1.4 .
I think it would be a good video lens, and a very good portrait lens.

[Latham]

haha in2fx and redal, your answers are perfect opposites! I was looking at a career in film so judging by redal, 1.4 sounds ideal but 1.8 is SO cheap and quite similar by the sound of it. Too confusing! is there any way to make a poll? what about a tripod?

[Redal]

haha in2fx and redal, your answers are perfect opposites! I was looking at a career in film so judging by redal, 1.4 sounds ideal but 1.8 is SO cheap and quite similar by the sound of it. Too confusing! is there any way to make a poll? what about a tripod?


If you are going to use it for video, id look at a fluid head tripod, sadly a good cheap one, isnt cheap :)

The reason i said the 50mmf1.4 over the 85f1.8 was you are using a 1.6 crop camera, 85mm is quite long on your camera.

Also the regarding the 50mmf1.4 and f1.8 , the focus ring on the f1.8 is pathetic, and when making video you will be using manual focusing a lot.

For $100-150 the f1.8 is a great lens, i have one myself. But if you have the money $400 the 50f1.4 is a better lens.

[Latham]

http://www.photowarehouse.co.nz/manfrotto-128lp-micro-fluid-video-head-for-tripod/

Would that be a good head? 550d only weighs 530g + 70-300mm lense which weighs 630g which is way under its 4kg limit. I guess 400 would be max for a tripod. I was looking on trademe and cheapest was $580. Do you think I could get it much cheaper?

[Latham]

Simple question, is better paying $250+ on a tripod and head rather than buying a cheapo?

[buildabrig]

Yes, I owned a crappy tripod for a while and it slowly broke down...screws falling out, handles breaking off.. I upgraded to a more expensive one ($200+, I can't remember now) and it has had no problems for 2-3 years.

It's worth it to get a good tripod, you spend less money in the long run when you have to 'upgrade' due to breakages.

[jackinavox]

i used the 50mm f1.8 for a long time because i couldn't justify buying the 1.4 version.

finally bit the bullet and bought the 1.4 a few months ago. difference is like night and day. it focuses faster/quieter, produces crisper and sharper images, provides better low light performance (this alone made it worth the extra $$$)

on a side note, bought my 50mm 1.8 for $190 and sold it one year later for $160.

[Latham]

Just bought the Sigma 50mm! now I just dont hope I made the wrong decision :confused:

[in2fx]

I'd have to agree with Redal about the focusing ring on the f/1.8 for video, but it is not such an issue for taking photos