Member of the Month

hi_vis360
November, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

New Lens Quiver for 7D

profile picture
kn0xville1g
Posts: 205 - Karma: 14
Hi All!

I am saving up to do some big/new purchases for my 7D by the end of this school year and hopefully have a majority of these things for Summer or by Fall.

I currently only have a 50mm prime for my camera along with the 18-135mm kit lens. i am going to be selling my 18-135mm soon and had these lenses in mind (hoping to get 1 of the 3 as a gift for grad/grades)

- Canon 100mm f/2.8L (for macro use, is this too much?)
- Canon 17-40mm f/4L (for landscape, reg use, etc... do i need more zoom?)
-Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 (for wide scene shots...does this lens have a minor fish eye effect on it?


** i am trying to find a decent telephoto that covers some wider shots as well as having enough zoom to carry around as a reg...keep in mind i have my canon 50mm f/1.4 right now but was looking for something around the 20mm-200mm range or so and have heard great things about some Sigma's and Canon's...**

with ^ in mind, i will be choosing from 3 and possibly getting rid of the 17-40mm as one of my choices but i have ALSO heard nothing but great things about that as well..would love some input though guys!
thanks for the help! ++
Feb 15 2011 1:06AM
0 0
profile picture
chacharlie
Posts: 228 - Karma: 20
Honestly, theres no one on here except you that knows which lenses will be the most useful/important. If you don't know which lenses you want, or why, I'd suggest shooting for a while and finding out specifically what you're lacking in the lenses you have now. If you just feel like buying lenses to help you progress, save your money and find out what you'll really need/use instead of just spending money because you feel like you need to.

I saved for almost a year to pick up a 70-200 vr because I thought I needed it. Every successful shooter had one (70-200 or 80-200), I saw it as a dependable 'staple lens' that every photographer needed and utilized. Bought it, and realized that I really didn't need it or like using the focal length. Don't know if that helps, but the point is, buy lenses when you feel they will allow you to expand your abilities, not when you feel like you don't have enough lenses.
Feb 15 2011 1:22AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61648 - Karma: 123,475
The 24-105 4L is a nice all around lens, lot of people have been stoked on it.

Also, check out the tamron 17-50mm 2.8

The tokina 11-16 is a great lens, do it up

As for macro im not sure, im pretty sure 100mm is a standard macro focal length.
Feb 15 2011 2:02AM
0 0
profile picture
solitaryman
Posts: 3578 - Karma: 123
For macro, there's no need for the 100 L. Just get the 100 EF, you don't need IS for macro as you'll be shooting on a tripod anyway (if you're serious about it) and it will save you 500 dollars.

Skip the 17-40 and go for 24-105 and a 70-200.
Feb 15 2011 9:18AM
0 0
profile picture
niels043
Posts: 814 - Karma: 185
70-200 very useful lens for everything and will never let you down, get which ever one you can afford. After that a 17-40 or 16-35 which ever you can afford would be a good idea. Stick to L glass
Feb 15 2011 12:35PM
0 0
profile picture
[~_~]
Posts: 20239 - Karma: 1,273
Canon macro 100mm is one of the few Canon lenses that blows me away. Stunning glass. Worth every penny.

Also, I would favor IS if you are not shooting a fluid head tripod such as a Miller or Sachtler.
Feb 15 2011 12:38PM
0 0
profile picture
TetonGravity
Posts: 104 - Karma: 5,344
I like the 70-200 for shooting skiing. It covers your ass when you are shooting cliffs or jumps that you can't get close to.
Feb 15 2011 3:13PM
0 0
profile picture
Balto
Posts: 25985 - Karma: 4,404
every one should have a 70-200L or a 100-400L/35-350L
Feb 15 2011 4:41PM
0 0
profile picture
50in07
Posts: 3070 - Karma: 1,471
If you're looking for any cheaper options you could go for the Tamron 17-50 2.8 like said before. I got it a few weeks ago and absolutely love it and lots of other people will agree that its a great lens.
Feb 15 2011 4:44PM
0 0
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31059 - Karma: 29,329
11-16 2.8
24-105 4L
70-200
extension tubes for your fifty vs a macro lens
Feb 15 2011 5:12PM
0 0
profile picture
jason...
Posts: 9006 - Karma: 780
Tokina 10-17f/3.5
17-40f/4 L
50f/1.8
70-200f/4L


pretty much my dream set up for my 7D. I am at 2 for 4 right now.
Feb 15 2011 5:46PM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,386
- Unless you're obsessive about wildflowers, there's really no need to get a macro specific lens. If you think that it would be a good prime, go for it.

- 17-40 would be a decent walk around lens, however I prefer a good mid-range zoom ( 24-70 ish range ) for a general use and landscape lens. It's nice to have the longer side of things. Lots of people like this lens, but others find it too soft. I don't think it's soft enough to worry too much about though.

- Tokina is a great lens for super wide shots of skiing and interiors, I would rarely use it for any sort of landscape photography. It's just too wide. It has very little distortion, not really enough to even notice, so if you want fisheye effect, get a fisheye.

for a longer zoom, get something in the 70-200 or 80-200 range. I think canon makes a 70-200 f4 L that's wonderful.
Feb 15 2011 5:54PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61648 - Karma: 123,475
50mm 1.8 is a dream lens? Comon, 1.4 for life.
Feb 15 2011 7:26PM
0 0
profile picture
Balto
Posts: 25985 - Karma: 4,404
1.0/1.2 are "dream" class
Feb 15 2011 7:45PM
0 0
profile picture
jason...
Posts: 9006 - Karma: 780
yeah i meant 1.4. already got 1.8, just so used to writing that. one day i will upgrade.
Feb 15 2011 7:46PM
0 0
profile picture
ChucklesNorman.
Posts: 1197 - Karma: 718
I'm currently saving for a 60D setup. I'm pretty much set on these lenses right now. I have a pretty small budget.

-Tamron 17-50 2.8 NON VC
-canon 50 1.4
-canon 70-200 4L

I plan on grabbing a the Tokina 11-16 a little later.

Thoughts?
Feb 15 2011 7:53PM
0 0
profile picture
deciblast
Posts: 52 - Karma: 10
I would look at vintage lenses too. See thread from a few pages ago about it. You can build a great quiver for a small amount. Get a lens around 28 or 35mm, 85mm, and then maybe the Tokina 11-16.


Feb 15 2011 7:59PM
0 0
profile picture
michelle
Posts: 6290 - Karma: 428
I own the 100mm macro, and it's absolutely definitely worth the money. It's fucking incredible. By far the sharpest lens I've ever shot with (I've used a lot). Fastest, lightest, sharpest.

If you plan on shooting portraits at all, get it. It never leaves my camera.
Feb 15 2011 7:59PM
0 0
profile picture
MAC.D
Posts: 5654 - Karma: 345
same
Feb 15 2011 8:06PM
0 0
profile picture
kn0xville1g
Posts: 205 - Karma: 14
thanks for the help guys, im definitely liking the idea of the 24-105mm..

as far as a mic goes, i would like to start investing in those as well....i have heardd good things and see some good reviews on the Rode Shotgun VideoMic, what do you think? is there something cheaper / decent for the price for something less professional like myself or would the $149 for this be a good investment (knowing i take care of it....i have read it is pretty 'flimsy'?)
Feb 17 2011 1:38PM
0 0
profile picture
WillStart
Posts: 3955 - Karma: 3,192
the videomic is pretty legit in my experience. for the price, it gets the job done. PBP has it on some of their DSLRs and it seems to do alright.
Feb 17 2011 1:44PM
0 0
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31059 - Karma: 29,329
i dont like it for two reasons:

one: its a push pull lens, kind of old school
two: not constant aperture. For me this is big because i do video too but for photogs its less relevant.
Feb 17 2011 5:41PM
0 0
profile picture
zahava
Posts: 7791 - Karma: 12,039
Feb 19 2011 12:12PM
0 0
profile picture
zahava
Posts: 7791 - Karma: 12,039
My bad.

Feb 19 2011 12:13PM
0 0
profile picture
RileySnyderPhoto
Posts: 688 - Karma: 1,451
The 100mm f/2.8L IS is totally worth the money, especially for how little it costs. One of the most impressive lenses out there and Dan Carr agrees:
http://dancarrphotography.com/blog/2010/08/05/canon-100mm-f2-8-l-macro-review/

As far as the 24-105 f/4L IS, I love it and it gets used for majority of my shots with the fisheye and macro taking the rest. Just bought the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II so I will have to let you know about that one.
Feb 19 2011 12:36PM
0 0
profile picture
xXDr4G0N5lY3RXx
Posts: 74 - Karma: 16
i cried while watching that video : (
Feb 19 2011 5:34PM
0 0
profile picture
messplay
Posts: 4483 - Karma: 1,066
thanks for the input riley. when you mention 'fisheye' does the 24-105 have that much distortion at the widest aperture / 24mm ? i was watching some reviews and i feel like it somewhat does...

if not, what would you recommend for a nice wide lens (i was looking at the tokina 11-16)
Feb 20 2011 4:25PM
0 0
profile picture
zahava
Posts: 7791 - Karma: 12,039
Shot on a t2i with a 24mm prime. Just to give you an idea of how wide 24mm is.

Feb 20 2011 4:30PM
0 0
profile picture
messplay
Posts: 4483 - Karma: 1,066
nice, that looks solid. thanks man.

as far as a DSLR rig goes, i was checking out the new cinevate simplis pro (solo) here @ http://www.cinevate.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=258

just dreaming but do any of you DSLR filmmakers use one of these? how effective would this be compared to a glidecam 2000 if i were to get one of those...im really working hard to get some $$$ and my parents are willing to support me as well for some projects i have lined up over the summer as well as my own personal use. i feel this rig would be effective in comparison to the glidecam as far as walking around and capturing footage.

Thanks for the input
Feb 20 2011 4:47PM
0 0
profile picture
messplay
Posts: 4483 - Karma: 1,066
clicky ^ for the rig
Feb 20 2011 4:48PM
0 0
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31059 - Karma: 29,329
definitely get a glidecam over a gunstock rig. I use a redrock micro shoulder rig and its moderately stable, but movement with it is a no go. If i want motion in my shots its a glidecam I use.

if you are thinking that vs a shoulder rig, i'd say shoulder is the way to go over gunstock.
Feb 20 2011 11:03PM
0 0
profile picture
messplay
Posts: 4483 - Karma: 1,066
jamie i can kind of sense that too as far as having that giant shoulder holster...especially with a one hand grip vs. dual. what do you recommend for a shoulder rig and where would be a good place to look (i only know of this simplis model/company...) thanks
Feb 20 2011 11:14PM
0 0
profile picture
RileySnyderPhoto
Posts: 688 - Karma: 1,451
I don't get much distortion at 24mm.
My lens line up is:
Canon 24-105 f/4L IS
Sigma 10 f/2.8 Fisheye
Canon 100 f/2.8L IS Macro
Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II

I use my fisheye if I need anything wider than 24. The Sigma 10-20 gets good results from what I see.
Feb 22 2011 12:08PM
0 0
profile picture
zahava
Posts: 7791 - Karma: 12,039
I want your lenses!
Feb 22 2011 12:22PM
0 0
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31059 - Karma: 29,329
Some shoulder rig companies that I can name off the top of my head are Redrock Micro, Zacuto, Cinevate, The Cine City, "gini rigs" on ebay (do a seller search for gini.2011 or gini2011). Gini rigs and the cine city have good deals, make an offer on shoulder rigs on gini (usually can get them for $300-350ish. If you are looking for used rigs check dvxuser.com's marketplace section, I got my RR for a steal there.
Feb 22 2011 4:11PM
0 0
profile picture
jibbinc.
Posts: 3355 - Karma: 2,497
sigma 18 - 50 f2.8
canon 75 -300 f 4 - 5.6
50mm f1.8

^my current setup

but i want a 11 - 17 fisheye
and the tokina i think its 10 - 16
mightve got those backwards
Feb 22 2011 4:18PM
0 0
profile picture
messplay
Posts: 4483 - Karma: 1,066
tokina is 11-16 and does that have a fisheye effect for how wide it is? i will be able to use this whenever i want this summer so i think im going to hold off on that lens for a while...it would be awesome if i could have the patience and save up enough to get Canon's new 14mm fisheye 1.28L
Feb 22 2011 4:29PM
0 0
profile picture
[~_~]
Posts: 20239 - Karma: 1,273
Its rectilinear (zero curvature; lines stay straight) and very wide, which is why I love it so much.
Feb 22 2011 4:45PM
0 0
profile picture
messplay
Posts: 4483 - Karma: 1,066
awesome thanks landis.

however, if i am looking for something with minor curvature, what would be a good lens that offers this kind of distortion, from videos ive seen with the 24-105L there is some at 24mm but if i am doing some architecturesque photos (for my upcoming job) as well as scenery, i would like to have this option
Feb 22 2011 4:49PM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,329
liar
Feb 22 2011 5:19PM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,386
you have a 7d. If you want a some distortion but not as much as a fisheye, just buy a full frame fisheye. You camera has a crop sensor so a 15 or 16 mm fisheye will not look super fishy. in fact, it will look like this:

Click for larger image

compared to this:

Click for larger image


that's exactly the same lens on a crop sensor vs. full fram camera. It's similar angles, although the second shot is from a little bit further down the deck.
Feb 22 2011 5:54PM
0 0
profile picture
[~_~]
Posts: 20239 - Karma: 1,273
You're going to want a rectilinear lens for architecture and landscape work because shooting a lens with barrel distortion, while abstract and intriguing at first, will get old really fast. Also, straight lines are usually preferable for this sort of thing, and if you're doing commissioned work you will have more favorable responses shooting rectilinear than you will with fisheye.

And while shooting a full frame fisheye on a crop sensor will make the effect much more subtle, it is nothing like shooting an actual rectilinear lens.
Feb 22 2011 10:25PM
0 0
profile picture
messplay
Posts: 4483 - Karma: 1,066
the tokina 11-16 will suffice or should i hold off on something with such a short range and stick to my 24-105L for a while ... ive heard some good things about the sigma 10-20 as well but im only looking at that thinking that  my 24-105L wont be wide enough for indoors...
Feb 22 2011 10:46PM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,386
I missed the part where you said architecture and indoors. I back up what Landis said.


On a crop sensor, the 24 isn't going to be very wide. The tokina has a small focal range, but it's the best lens of the third party super wides IMO. The Sigma and the Tamron 11-18 have terrible complex distortion (you can't fix it in photoshop or any other program I'm aware of). It's super wavy. The tokina has minimal distortion that you can correct easily in PS.

Tokina also makes a 12-24, which is f4. It's certainly another option, but the f2.8 will be useful for shooting interiors. I could shoot handheld f2.8 at ISO 500 with a shutter speed between 1/25 and 1/10 inside big, dark cathedrals in Italy and get good exposures.
Feb 22 2011 11:01PM
0 0
profile picture
messplay
Posts: 4483 - Karma: 1,066
awesome thanks trevor, ill definitely keep that in mind, that solidifies my stance on the tokina. and yes, i prefer 2.8 over f4 despite the minimal range it'll offer.
Feb 22 2011 11:04PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)