• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

24-70mm,2.8L as first lense

Don Finch

New member
I purchased a 5D and the above lense about 2 months ago. I must say it has been fun compared to the P&S HP I used previously. But as time goes by and I get better at post processing the results to my eyes are amazing. I use the DPP that came with the camera and for now it satisfies my taste.

Next purchase (soon) is the 100mm,macro with a ring lite so I can write off this digital imaging equipment to some extent. The dentist in me requires it. At least that is what I say! The next lense is a question because I'm not sure if I want the 70-200 range or another choice with IS. I get an urge to shoot birds every now and then so any ideas if someone can chime in later would be appreciated.

Thanks for listening,

def
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
definchdds said:
I purchased a 5D and the above lense about 2 months ago. I must say it has been fun compared to the P&S HP I used previously. But as time goes by and I get better at post processing the results to my eyes are amazing. I use the DPP that came with the camera and for now it satisfies my taste.

Next purchase (soon) is the 100mm,macro with a ring lite so I can write off this digital imaging equipment to some extent. The dentist in me requires it. At least that is what I say! The next lense is a question because I'm not sure if I want the 70-200 range or another choice with IS. I get an urge to shoot birds every now and then so any ideas if someone can chime in later would be appreciated.

Thanks for listening,

def

The lens you might look at is superb and under appreciated and built for the oral cavity. It is the Canon EF 50mm 2.5 Macro and takes a ring light.

This is one of the greatest bargains out!

Otherwise the 70-200 2.8 IS is a superb choice for portraits and landscapes and even Safaris. However, you need 1.4x version II multiplier to get you to at least 280mm. I feel that if you really want to shoot birds and not be handicapped, ask Don Cohen, our bird guy! Ideally a 100-400 or a 400 prime is the minimum, but of course can be rented.

Asher
 
Welcome to OPF!

I have a dentist friend who shoots with a 20D (he joined us on one of my Costa Rica workshops), and I'm pretty sure he uses it for intra-oral photography. I'll check with him and see what gear he uses for this.

As for birds, Asher is correct. A 70-200 would not really be adequate for the majority of bird photography, as the subject is too small, and the distances are too great. Adding a teleconverter will help increase your reach, but here the full-frame of the 5D will work against you, since there is no "crop" factor to effectively increase your focal length.

The 100-400 is certainly a very versatile outdoor wildlife lens, and would be more appropriate for bird photography than the 70-200. Most reviews conclude it produces better images than the 70-200 used with the 2x converter. And if you really get serious about birds, the next steps up get big and expensive!

Best of luck,
 

danielsan

New member
The 100-400 IS is a nice flexible zoom. The 400 5.6 prime has faster autofocus(better for bird flight shots), is sharper wide open and performs better with a TC than the 100-400.

Personally, I do not miss the flexibility of the zoom. In fact, I usually wish I had more reach. Of course your situation may be different depending on what you shoot. 70-200 will not cut it though as others have already pointed out.

To move above those 2 lenses, you really have to start putting some big bucks down. There are a few 3rd party alternatives as well such as the Sigma 50-500 but the two Canons I mentioned seem to be the most popular.

definchdds said:
Next purchase (soon) is the 100mm,macro with a ring lite so I can write off this digital imaging equipment to some extent. The dentist in me requires it. At least that is what I say! The next lense is a question because I'm not sure if I want the 70-200 range or another choice with IS. I get an urge to shoot birds every now and then so any ideas if someone can chime in later would be appreciated.

Thanks for listening,

def
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
I have the sense that there has been a movement by birders towards higher end lenses, so that the 400 5.6 is a commodity in the used lens market. So it could be a great bargain used. Anyone know what the current price range is?

This lens is really required on a photo safari too. Adding this to a 1DII, one has a 560mm optical machine gun!

Life is short. You like birds: get this lens!

Asher
 

Don Finch

New member
Don Cohen said:
Welcome to OPF!

I have a dentist friend who shoots with a 20D (he joined us on one of my Costa Rica workshops), and I'm pretty sure he uses it for intra-oral photography. I'll check with him and see what gear he uses for this.

As for birds, Asher is correct. A 70-200 would not really be adequate for the majority of bird photography, as the subject is too small, and the distances are too great. Adding a teleconverter will help increase your reach, but here the full-frame of the 5D will work against you, since there is no "crop" factor to effectively increase your focal length.

The 100-400 is certainly a very versatile outdoor wildlife lens, and would be more appropriate for bird photography than the 70-200. Most reviews conclude it produces better images than the 70-200 used with the 2x converter. And if you really get serious about birds, the next steps up get big and expensive!

Best of luck,
Dan,
Thank you for the reply.
I think the 100-400 is on the list!!

Don Finch
 

Don Finch

New member
Asher Kelman said:
The lens you might look at is superb and under appreciated and built for the oral cavity. It is the Canon EF 50mm 2.5 Macro and takes a ring light.

This is one of the greatest bargains out!

Otherwise the 70-200 2.8 IS is a superb choice for portraits and landscapes and even Safaris. However, you need 1.4x version II multiplier to get you to at least 280mm. I feel that if you really want to shoot birds and not be handicapped, ask Don Cohen, our bird guy! Ideally a 100-400 or a 400 prime is the minimum, but of course can be rented.

Asher
Asher,
The 50mm macro and ring light sound great. On a 5D is it too close to the patient?

Thank you also for the welcome message to OPF. The name here is Don Finch. Yes I am a dentist and becoming ever more a photo enthusiast!! I am soon to be 64 and I work less and less so my time is open for my hobby.

This forum is wonderful, I like the look and feel for its personableness if that is a word.

def
 

danielsan

New member
BY higher end, do you mean higher than the 100-400 and 400? The cost really shoots up, as you know, for the super teles. We would all like a 500 f4 IS but only so many people can afford/justify it.

The 400 5.6 seems to be going for at least $950 used. Not exactly a bargain considering brand new is around $1090 not including any rebates you might be eligible for(collecting it is another matter....). IMO though there are few bargains in lens anymore. The resale value of lenses amazes me.

Asher Kelman said:
I have the sense that there has been a movement by birders towards higher end lenses, so that the 400 5.6 is a commodity in the used lens market. So it could be a great bargain used. Anyone know what the current price range is?

This lens is really required on a photo safari too. Adding this to a 1DII, one has a 560mm optical machine gun!

Life is short. You like birds: get this lens!

Asher
 

john_edwards

New member
I'm sure they are gone now but I purchased a re-furb 400 5.6 at Allen's Camera two weeks ago for 899. You cannot tell it from new. The used ones on Fred Miranda seem to go for 950-975. If you are very careful you can print 100% crops with this lens. (but in my heart I wish I had the 500/4.
John
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Congrats! Allen's camera, for those who do not as yet know, is one of those U.S. gems, alongside guys like B&H who are absolutely honest!

I'm so glad you mentioned them.

Feel free to post their contact info!

Asher
 

Tim Rogers

New member
I agree

[/QUOTE]IMO though there are few bargains in lens anymore. The resale value of lenses amazes me.[/QUOTE]

It's hardly worthwhile to even look at a used lens when you can get a new one along with a warranty for very little added expense. The exceptions would be some of the discontinued ones like the 80-200/2.8 and 200/1.8 which are known to be very good lenses. I would like to save maybe 25% when taking a chance on a lens that someone else has chosen to let go..........just my opinion.
 

Will Thompson

Well-known member
For serious bird photography the lens of choice is the EF 600mm f4 L IS + both the mkII tele-converters stacked and on the backup body a EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS for when the get too close or do a fly by.

Will T.
 

danielsan

New member
If you want/need the last ounce of reach the 600 f4 makes sense but many people opt for the 500 f/4 for more portability. Speaking of long, heavy lenses, I have seen shots from the Sigma 300-800 that are very impressive.

Will Thompson said:
For serious bird photography the lens of choice is the EF 600mm f4 L IS + both the mkII tele-converters stacked and on the backup body a EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS for when the get too close or do a fly by.

Will T.
 

Kathy Rappaport

pro member
I have the 5D and I use the 50 2.5 macro- it's my favorite lens. I recently bought the 5D to be able to use that lens as my base lens - I was using the 20D and it just didn't give me the results I wanted. I also use the 24-70L 2.8
 

Tom Yi

New member
Don,
I think from my dentist friends, when they get a lens for shooting teeth, that they often get the 50mm macro.
I guess a 100mm macro would work as well and allow you to stand back farther, but I'm not sure if that may be too far away though. I've never done dental photography, so I'm just guessing here.

As for a first lens for a 5D, 24-70 is an excellent range. Zooms with that range are called walking around lens due to it's versatility for many uses. If cost is an issue, Tamron offers a 28-75 f2.8 and Sigma offers a 24-70 f2.8 and a 24-60 f2.8 that are optically excellent and lighter in terms of weight and costs as well.

As for birding/animals, the Canon 100-400IS L may be a better idea than a 70-200 2.8 as you'll generally need more reach. Another option is the Sigma 50-500 AKA Bigma. On a FF camera, I heard that there is a bit of a light falloff, but I think you would see this with the Canon 100-400L as well.

If you want to compare lenses for Canons, photozone.de has good tests of many lenses to fit Canon EF mount.
Good luck.
 
Top