Monday, 5 December 2016

lens - Is it better to start out by buying a cheaper body and more expensive accessories?


In February 2010 I bought my first DSLR: EOS Rebel XSi EF-S 18-55IS Kit I also bought a zoom telephoto lens: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM


The XSi is a simple camera which I thought would be good enough for learning photography and it has been fitting its purpose well.


At some moment in the future I plan to buy a full frame DSL, probably a 5D Mark II. Not sure about that yet.


Since I can keep the accessories and lenses while upgrading to new bodies, I decided to invest in the best accessories and lenses I could afford.


When I decided to buy a speedlite, I bought a Speedlite 580EX II.


Now I'm starting to look for a new lenses. A book I'm reading recommended a prime lenses for exercising composition and also for the generally better optics.


In different places I saw recommendations on buying 50mm primes lenses as they give proximately the field of view of our natural vision.



I've been thinking on investing in an L series lenses, more specifically a EF 50mm f / 1.2L USM


It is very expensive, but it is something that I'll be able to use for a long time even while I upgrade to more powerful EOS bodies.


So instead of buying cheaper accessories and eventually replacing them later with better quality ones, I am planning to buy better quality ones and only exchange/upgrade the body.


Do you guys think this is a good strategy? If not, what would be a better one?



Answer



Alfred, I would recommend doing some homework on a case by case basis. For the 50mm f/1.2L, Alan is right, the 50mm f/1.4 is a great value for the money and will work really just fine. I have a full frame Canon 5D Mark II and this is one of the first lens I bought. I use it to shoot concerts, live performances, etc. I just shot 350 frames tonight in a very dark venue and it performs as well as when I got it. The 5DMII is hungry, but this lens delivers. One of my friend just bought a 5D (the original), and even his cheap 50mm f/1.8 does the trick. Remember that at f/1.2 your focus plane is incredibly thin, so you really have to be able to focus precisely on what you want, and make the corresponding composition decisions.


There are L lenses that are notoriously good. The Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS, for example, is absolutely hands down my best and favorite lens. I would recommend it anytime over the non L version. I have the Canon 24-105mm f/4.0L IS (the kit lens), and while not that fast, it's a good versatile lens that I would use when I wanted to travel light (nowadays I would probably trade it for the next 24-70mm f/2.8 when it's released). I have the 16-35mm f/2.8L II and again, very strong performer, but I've never tried another ultra-wide non L glass on that body. Obviously stay away from EF-S lenses, but there are not that many anyway.


For the flash, I think you made the right call, I really like the 580 EXII because my 5DMII can "talk" to it straight from its internal menus, and it's likely all the new Canon will too. It can behave as a master too (I have a 430EXII as a slave unit).


Lenses are a better investment than a camera, they resell for really good value so you can't really go that wrong, but don't go too crazy either; I still have to meet someone who would swear by that 50mm f/1.2.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Why is the front element of a telephoto lens larger than a wide angle lens?

A wide angle lens has a wide angle of view, therefore it would make sense that the front of the lens would also be wide. A telephoto lens ha...