Forums
New posts
Articles
Product Reviews
Policies
FAQ
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Digital Lifestyle
Images, Graphic Design, and Digital Photography
New body or new lens?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Doug b" data-source="post: 1101186" data-attributes="member: 59143"><p>Well, I agree with him on spending on lenses vs a new body, but specifically because you mentioned that you do studio work. I don't agree with him that your current body would be just the same as a 7D in terms of high ISO noise control though, so if you were to be doing a lot of candid night shooting without a flash, then that would be important as well. </p><p></p><p>But hold on a minute with the zoom lenses. If you're primary interest is studio photography, and you're ready to start building a pro kit, then I'd personally recommend going the way of primes. I've heard that the 85 1.2 is nothing short of perfect, and looking at sample photos, it's easy to agree with that assessment: <a href="http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=22&p=2" target="_blank">Full-size sample photos from Canon 85mm F/1.2</a></p><p></p><p>I also TOTALLY disagree with him about third party lenses. Well, Tamron I've found to be crap in general but Sigma produces some great optics when you get past their iffy quality control issues. Lately, they've been much better, and their latest lenses are gorgeous (50 1.4 - 30 1.8 ) in terms of IQ. I actually own their 28 1.8 and it's spot on with my Nikon D300 in every way. And if their new lenses coming out very shortly have the same optics as their 50 1.4 (which I'm sure it will) then I'm likely going to buy it over the new soon to arrive Nikon 85 1.4 And Sigma is very good about repairs, so if focus is off, they'll fix it very quickly and you're promised to get a good copy. </p><p></p><p>I also wouldn't ever discard Zeiss or Tokina depending upon the subject. Tokina makes a couple of excellent wide and ultra wide angle lenses, like their 11-16mm. Just look at them on pixel peepers. </p><p></p><p>What do you shoot in the studio ? If anything, I'd invest in really great glass and perhaps think about another camera down the line as a second body so you don't have to keep changing lenses all the time. That camera doesn't have to be anything more than a used version of what you already have. </p><p></p><p>How's your lighting equipment situation, by the way ? Because that's actually a **** of a lot more important than the body OR the lens if it's lacking. That is, since you're in a studio. </p><p></p><p>That said, have you seen this: <a href="http://fstoppers.com/iphone/" target="_blank">http://fstoppers.com/iphone/</a></p><p></p><p>The video is very amusing/entertaining, but I do take issue with his approach. Though he sets up some softboxes with flood lights from Lowes, those octoboxes and softboxes are VERY expensive, and kind of defeat the purpose of his entire point. Regardless, it does prove what a difference lighting makes in the grand scheme of things. </p><p></p><p>Doug</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Doug b, post: 1101186, member: 59143"] Well, I agree with him on spending on lenses vs a new body, but specifically because you mentioned that you do studio work. I don't agree with him that your current body would be just the same as a 7D in terms of high ISO noise control though, so if you were to be doing a lot of candid night shooting without a flash, then that would be important as well. But hold on a minute with the zoom lenses. If you're primary interest is studio photography, and you're ready to start building a pro kit, then I'd personally recommend going the way of primes. I've heard that the 85 1.2 is nothing short of perfect, and looking at sample photos, it's easy to agree with that assessment: [url=http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=22&p=2]Full-size sample photos from Canon 85mm F/1.2[/url] I also TOTALLY disagree with him about third party lenses. Well, Tamron I've found to be crap in general but Sigma produces some great optics when you get past their iffy quality control issues. Lately, they've been much better, and their latest lenses are gorgeous (50 1.4 - 30 1.8 ) in terms of IQ. I actually own their 28 1.8 and it's spot on with my Nikon D300 in every way. And if their new lenses coming out very shortly have the same optics as their 50 1.4 (which I'm sure it will) then I'm likely going to buy it over the new soon to arrive Nikon 85 1.4 And Sigma is very good about repairs, so if focus is off, they'll fix it very quickly and you're promised to get a good copy. I also wouldn't ever discard Zeiss or Tokina depending upon the subject. Tokina makes a couple of excellent wide and ultra wide angle lenses, like their 11-16mm. Just look at them on pixel peepers. What do you shoot in the studio ? If anything, I'd invest in really great glass and perhaps think about another camera down the line as a second body so you don't have to keep changing lenses all the time. That camera doesn't have to be anything more than a used version of what you already have. How's your lighting equipment situation, by the way ? Because that's actually a **** of a lot more important than the body OR the lens if it's lacking. That is, since you're in a studio. That said, have you seen this: [url]http://fstoppers.com/iphone/[/url] The video is very amusing/entertaining, but I do take issue with his approach. Though he sets up some softboxes with flood lights from Lowes, those octoboxes and softboxes are VERY expensive, and kind of defeat the purpose of his entire point. Regardless, it does prove what a difference lighting makes in the grand scheme of things. Doug [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Digital Lifestyle
Images, Graphic Design, and Digital Photography
New body or new lens?
Top