# Your opinion about my lenses and my photography attitude?



## criza (Feb 28, 2012)

Hey! I've got a Canon 60D with the following lenses:

Canon EF 15mm 2.8 Fisheye
Canon EF 28mm 1.8
Canon EF 100mm 2.8 Macro
Canon EF 200mm 2.8 II
(and a 430EX II flash)

As you may have noticed I'm not a big fan of zoom lenses, it distracts me too much in relating to framing, so with my four primes I have to move around a lot and composition is for me easier than with a zoom, where you first have to choose the focal length and then start to think how your final frame should look like. This may sound stupid, I don't know. I also prefer the superior IQ of the primes, as my budget isn't unlimited.

In the not to near future I am planning to go full frame. It may also been a reason I chose these four specific lenses. The plan is to get a full frame and then replace the 28mm 1.8 with a 35mm 1.4. 

I like to shoot a lot of subjects, and I prefer to make spontaneous pictures, that's what I do most. You can also call it street photography. I am looking forward to make some conceptional pictures, also because I want to build up a portfolio. I shot around 12'000 pictures with my 60D (and 9'000 with my sold 400D) and I've got plenty of splendid shots. The only thing is my best shots are very broad regarding theme and subjects, and I really don't know yet what I am best at shooting or what's my favorite subjects are. Well, actually I prefer to shoot people. Until now more without a set up, also because I haven't got the opportunity to have a model and a studio at hand. Or enough free time and a model with enough free time. Whatever.

Soo, what do you think about this? What way am I going? Thank you for every opinion and reply!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 28, 2012)

Nice kit! I'd definitely recommend the 35L over the 28/1.8 for FF. 

Else, on FF you might find 200mm too short for candid street shots. You could consider the 300/4 L IS, or you could add a 1.4x TC to the 200/2.8.


----------



## Del (Feb 28, 2012)

Surprised you have not got a 50/1.4 which would be a good portrait or walk around lens on a 1.6x crop. I use my 50mm indoors on my 7D a lot. Also depends on whether you're into video or not. You seem to have 'wide' and 'long' but not much in between. Just an observation.


----------



## criza (Feb 28, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Nice kit! I'd definitely recommend the 35L over the 28/1.8 for FF.
> 
> Else, on FF you might find 200mm too short for candid street shots. You could consider the 300/4 L IS, or you could add a 1.4x TC to the 200/2.8.


Thanks.
I really like the 200mm 'cause of its light weight, what you can't really say about the 300/4 L IS.
A 1.4x TC isn't a bad idea at all! I would prefer the TC over a big white lens ;-), also because I like to carry around my equipment all the time, and until now it's not to heavy at all (and it fits into my Kata DR-467i).


----------



## criza (Feb 28, 2012)

Del said:


> Surprised you have not got a 50/1.4 which would be a good portrait or walk around lens on a 1.6x crop. I use my 50mm indoors on my 7D a lot. Also depends on whether you're into video or not. You seem to have 'wide' and 'long' but not much in between. Just an observation.


I had the 50/1.8 (with my 400D) and it was a good start, but I couldn't arrange with the focal length.
It was too close for me indoors, and even outdoors it was either too close or not close enough! That's the reason I bought a 28mm and right after that the 100mm, so I walk around with one of them . The 28mm gives me a nice to use 44mm full frame equivalent.
I'll probably will get a 50mm when I am going full frame, but as said the 80mm full frame equivalent didn't suit me, and now I am wondering for what you are using the 7D + 50mm indoors?


----------



## jwong (Feb 28, 2012)

criza said:


> I had the 50/1.8 (with my 400D) and it was a good start, but I couldn't arrange with the focal length.
> It was too close for me indoors, and even outdoors it was either too close or not close enough! That's the reason I bought a 28mm and right after that the 100mm, so I walk around with one of them . The 28mm gives me a nice to use 44mm full frame equivalent.
> I'll probably will get a 50mm when I am going full frame, but as said the 80mm full frame equivalent didn't suit me, and now I am wondering for what you are using the 7D + 50mm indoors?



50mm can be use on crop bodies as a portrait lens. 85mm can be used for head shots. The 50 and 85 on a crop would be similar to the 85 and 135 on a full frame. It takes some getting used to if you're used to shooting wider focal lengths, but the change in perspective can be refreshing.


----------



## bycostello (Feb 28, 2012)

surprised primes and spontaneous go together....


----------



## criza (Feb 28, 2012)

bycostello said:


> surprised primes and spontaneous go together....


But why are you surprised? Until you zoom to the right length the spontaneous moment is gone, isn't it? ;o)


----------



## Janco (Feb 28, 2012)

criza said:


> bycostello said:
> 
> 
> > surprised primes and spontaneous go together....
> ...



I think that's what bycostello indicated, not sure though. From another point of view, since the picture might not be composed to perfection anyway, it might also be good for spontaneous pictures to have a zoom, maybe not a too big range. A quick zoom might be performed quite quickly if necessary. Not very practical of course for shots from the hip


----------



## CanineCandidsByL (Feb 28, 2012)

I have to problem with people who shoot primes either primarily or exclusively. While the image quality might not be that that much better than modern zooms, I find that people who use primes a lot tend to learn composition better and faster.

Obviously if you were shooting sports or similar, then a zoom might be prefereable/necessary, but due to slow film, I often had to shoot a fast fifty for my high school's athletics, so nothing is always true.


----------



## AJ (Feb 28, 2012)

_The plan is to get a full frame and then replace the 28mm 1.8 with a 35mm 1.4. _

Maybe replace 28/1.8 with 50/1.4 for similar framing? 50 mm may not have worked for you on crop, but you may like it on FF.

As for attitude - who cares what other people think. Just go shoot and do what you like to do.


----------



## Del (Feb 28, 2012)

I'm using 50mm on 7D mostly for one-on-one documentary interviews. It gives you a good one-third fill on head n' shoulders from about 6 to 8 feet away, but main reason is the large aperture that's necessary even with 4 x 625 watt 5500K lights on umbrella stands either side, although I hate shooting video below 2.8.

I did an interview with a retailer recently standing at the entrance to their store with the rest of the shopping mall in the background and opened it right up to f1.4 and the bokeh from the neon lights & store signs in the backdrop as well as blurry shoppers looked great.


----------



## criza (Feb 28, 2012)

Del said:


> I'm using 50mm on 7D mostly for one-on-one documentary interviews. It gives you a good one-third fill on head n' shoulders from about 6 to 8 feet away, but main reason is the large aperture that's necessary even with 4 x 625 watt 5500K lights on umbrella stands either side, although I hate shooting video below 2.8.
> 
> I did an interview with a retailer recently standing at the entrance to their store with the rest of the shopping mall in the background and opened it right up to f1.4 and the bokeh from the neon lights & store signs in the backdrop as well as blurry shoppers looked great.


Sounds good  Where can I see this retailer guy picture? I am using the the 100mm for head portraits, but it's true, a 50mm does the job better, at least on a crop camera.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 28, 2012)

criza said:


> Hey! I've got a Canon 60D with the following lenses:
> 
> Canon EF 15mm 2.8 Fisheye
> Canon EF 28mm 1.8
> ...



There is that big 1.6 crop factor that you are going to lose, its not trivial. Your 200mm lens looked like 320mm on your 60D, and now it will be 200mm. The 35mmL will replace your 28mm ok, but you may be missing 50mm, 85mm, and 135mm on the 5D MK II.

I use 85mm and 135mm is my most used focal length.

Why not get a 5D with the kit zoom, and use it to find out what focal lengths you will use. You can always resell it for more than the kit price.


----------



## criza (Feb 28, 2012)

AJ said:


> _The plan is to get a full frame and then replace the 28mm 1.8 with a 35mm 1.4. _
> 
> Maybe replace 28/1.8 with 50/1.4 for similar framing? 50 mm may not have worked for you on crop, but you may like it on FF.
> 
> As for attitude - who cares what other people think. Just go shoot and do what you like to do.


Yes, a 50mm should be a must with a full frame, that's what I wrote already somewhere above..

Yeah, I generally do not care about other people opinions, but for this time I wanted to know it!  So I don't hang around with other photographers, and now I was looking for some chit chat about my equipment? Some guy reading this and having the same preferences for primes may tell me some for me unknown secrets, haha.

Actually this is what I am missing, a mentor! You can self study photography but you learn slower as if someone is watching over your shoulder, or you over his/her.


----------



## kubelik (Feb 28, 2012)

never particularly understood the fascination with the 50mm focal length as a walk-around shooting lens length. it may be because I started off shooting architecture, but the 50-85 range to me is always, as someone else mentioned, either too-tight or not-tight-enough when I walk around with it. I'd far rather have a 28mm or 35mm prime to use to general purpose photography (focal length on a FF sensor) ...

as far as the OP's gear goes, it's a fine start ... but really any lens and camera at all is fine as long as you learn how to use it properly. if all you had was a 60D and the 200mm f/2.8 prime, people on the forums would all observe that it was a bizarre focal length to start with and go buy other stuff ... but if you have some smashing images shot with a 60D and the 200mm f/2.8 ... who are they to tell you anything?

it's cool to be a generalist photographer, most people who aren't doing it for the money enjoy the freedom to be a generalist (and many working professionals secretly harbor the desire to be a carefree generalist). learn the craft, learn your equipment, and just shoot shoot shoot. people say quantity doesn't count, just quality, but in reality, unless you're freakishly gifted and visionary, quantity counts as well. shoot until the shutter mechanism on the camera breaks, and I guarantee you will see improvement in your work.


----------



## criza (Feb 28, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> There is that big 1.6 crop factor that you are going to lose, its not trivial. Your 200mm lens looked like 320mm on your 60D, and now it will be 200mm. The 35mmL will replace your 28mm ok, but you may be missing 50mm, 85mm, and 135mm on the 5D MK II.
> 
> I use 85mm and 135mm is my most used focal length.
> 
> Why not get a 5D with the kit zoom, and use it to find out what focal lengths you will use. You can always resell it for more than the kit price.



That's a good point. After I got full frame, I really have to know which focal lengths I do use, and which not. It's possible that I will replace the 28mm not with a 35mm, but with a 85 (and later a 135mm).

What about the 100mm on a full frame? Wouldn't you consider it? Well the 85mm is close to it, as well as the 135m, so if you got these two the 100mm may not be that necessary, except that it's a Macro and that's what I got it for, too! 

What I am looking forward is the better ISO performance with a more expensive (full frame) camera, and of course I will be able to use my fisheye as fisheye lens, and not just as a ultra wide like now.


----------



## criza (Feb 28, 2012)

kubelik said:


> never particularly understood the fascination with the 50mm focal length as a walk-around shooting lens length. it may be because I started off shooting architecture, but the 50-85 range to me is always, as someone else mentioned, either too-tight or not-tight-enough when I walk around with it. I'd far rather have a 28mm or 35mm prime to use to general purpose photography (focal length on a FF sensor) ...
> 
> as far as the OP's gear goes, it's a fine start ... but really any lens and camera at all is fine as long as you learn how to use it properly. if all you had was a 60D and the 200mm f/2.8 prime, people on the forums would all observe that it was a bizarre focal length to start with and go buy other stuff ... but if you have some smashing images shot with a 60D and the 200mm f/2.8 ... who are they to tell you anything?
> 
> it's cool to be a generalist photographer, most people who aren't doing it for the money enjoy the freedom to be a generalist (and many working professionals secretly harbor the desire to be a carefree generalist). learn the craft, learn your equipment, and just shoot shoot shoot. people say quantity doesn't count, just quality, but in reality, unless you're freakishly gifted and visionary, quantity counts as well. shoot until the shutter mechanism on the camera breaks, and I guarantee you will see improvement in your work.


 8) I feel quite comfortable as a "generalist", true! But for the future I may leave this status, also because I consider making money with photography (and will have to get these so called zoom lenses).

For the most walk around, I am using, as I stated somewhere above, the 28mm lens as a 44mm equivalent on my 60D crop, and it's just on the edge to be too tight. I agree with you that 50-85mm may be too tight/not too tight. That's also the reason I love it to use my 15mm fisheye on my crop camera, so I got a ultra wide (24mm equivalent), so it compares to the set up with a full frame and a 24mm/35mm!

As well I agree with the quantity shooting! In his amazing book The Passionate Photographer, Steve Simon quotes another guy (I can't recall his name at the moment) from the film age, telling that until you reach 100'000 shoots, you are not a (real) photographer. ;-)


----------



## Drizzt321 (Feb 28, 2012)

If you want a great lens with a bit of reach, the 135mm f/2 is awesome on my 5d2. Won't have as much length as your 200mm, but you can always use a 1.4x or 2x TC with it. Just don't forget to get some ND filters if you want to be able to open it up to get the wonderful bokeh this lens can produce.


----------



## AJ (Feb 28, 2012)

criza said:


> Actually this is what I am missing, a mentor! You can self study photography but you learn slower as if someone is watching over your shoulder, or you over his/her.



I suggest joining a critique site. Personally, I used to be quite active on photosig. I learned quite a bit there. I think people also exchange critiques on photo.net


----------



## wickidwombat (Feb 28, 2012)

Do your self a favour get a 50 f1.4 even grab the nifty 50 f1.8 for $100 it gives you close to 80mm on your crop and once you go FF 50mm is a wonderfull length then also get an 85mm for FF portraits I absolutely love my sigma 85 f1.4 its one of my favourite lenses


----------



## criza (Feb 29, 2012)

AJ said:


> I suggest joining a critique site. Personally, I used to be quite active on photosig. I learned quite a bit there. I think people also exchange critiques on photo.net


I didn't know such a site exists, although I stumbled over it one time. I may try this out, thanks!
Can you give me an example for what you learned there?


----------



## Daniel Flather (Mar 1, 2012)

jwong said:


> criza said:
> 
> 
> > I had the 50/1.8 (with my 400D) and it was a good start, but I couldn't arrange with the focal length.
> ...




Yeah, but a 50mm on a crop has a view of an 85, but the perspective of a 50, and for tight portraits that's not the best combo. The 85 or 135 (even your 200L) on a FF would be much better.


----------

