 Keri L. Malinowski |
Looking at new Canon EF S 17-85 I'm looking into the new Canon EF S 17-85mm f4.5 for my canon 20D as well as the canon 24-70 f2.8L for weddings and portraits. I like teh wider angle of the 17-85 converting to 27-136 also nice for portraits, however i'm not sure of it quality for weddings?? Does anyone have this or have pics to share? Any thoughts as to which one would be the better choice? I've asked a few questions regarding the 24-70 already but just found the 17-85 for made specifically for digital rebel and 20D-however still converts to 27-136-any thoughts??? thanks keri
|
|
|
|
||
|
Keri L. Malinowski |
Or perhaps the Sigma 18-125mm f3.5??? Keri again
|
|
|
|
||
|
Andy |
The EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM on the 20D, which is almost the duplicate of the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM on film camera, is a very good lens and suitable for weddings. The EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM on the 20D is a little too 'long'. How about the EF 17-40mm f/4L USM. It's only one stop slower than the 24-70 but it is also a 'L' lens and appropriate for weddings. Another advantage is that you can get both EF 17-40 and EF-S 17-85 for the price of EF 24-70. I have not used any Sigma lens so I cannot comment on it.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Keri L. Malinowski |
Thanks thats good advice-I was also looking at for wider angle the 16-35 f2.8 L lens since it is faster and better in low light situations for churches and such-but also have the canon 50mm 1.8 which is good for low light just not wide angle shots for groups conversion going to 80mm--do you think the 17-40 is good for church like situations where I will most likely be able to use lights and flash before or after the ceremony and just use my 50mm for during the ceremony? thanks sorry so full of questions Keri
|
|
|
|
||
|
Andy |
Personally I will pick the EF 17-40mm f/4L USM over the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM because of the price (about half but lost 1 stop). Also Canon mentioned that the EF 17-40 is a newer design for both film and digital camera. Together with the EF 50mm f/1.8 II, you should be able to cover all focal length in the wedding.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Keri L. Malinowski |
thanks I appreciate the advice-So I'm thinking the 17-40mm f/4L and then the Canon 17-85 f4 for digital combined with my 50mm would be a great combination for weddings/groups/headshots/portraits... How does that sound? Or would you suggest not getting the 17-85 if i'm getting the 17-40? Iknow so many questions... Man I'm going to be broke:) thanks keri
|
|
|
|
||
|
Andy |
My advice in photo equipment: enough is enough. I shoot weddings using the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM and a film camera. The EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM alone is enough. Your EF 50mm f/1.8 can be used indoor or as a backup. Your 20D's ISO setting can made up the one or two stops lost not using the L lenses because of the superb noise control. But it is your decision if you MUST have the L lens. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Scot Benton |
I use the 24-70 f2.8L and the 50 f1.4 for weddings and portrait photography. I love them and have not had any trouble with them. I am now using them on a Rebel 350 XT.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Keri L. Malinowski |
Well I guess its all a matter of preference. The only reason I'm thinking L lenses is for the sharpness. I like crisp photos over soft looking ones (nice in some situations but not my personal preference) I have the 50 f1.8 not 1.4 but its close. I guess Scot B. you find the 24-70 good for groups larger than 8? I'm not sure yet what I'm going to do-renting it this weekend to play around and see how I like it. thanks for all the advice keri
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||