What would you do.

daza

daza

Messages
202
Edit My Images
Yes
Righty then.

Just just a quick background, I'm doing my first year at college in photography to learn how I get the results I do if that makes sense and to find my feet in what Id actually like to in the business.

Now my "kit" bag currently has the following;
Canon 40d
Canon 1000d
canon 50mm F1.8
Falcon 8mm fisheye F3.5
Tamron 17-50 2.8 non vc
Tokina 11-16mm F2.8
Tamron 18-250 F3.5-F5.6
Canon L 70-200 F4 non is

Along with various filters remote tripod the usual.
Click to expand...

After looking through my library photos I'm noticing that the 70-200 hardly ever gets used as I just do seem to shoot over 50mm I usually use the shorter focal lengths more, I bought it just to see what the fuss was about.

Now my dilemma is this I've been eyeing up the canon 50d recently to replace the 1000d as I miss spot metering. Now you may ask why not the 60d well I refuse to invest in more SD cards I've got 5 compact flash cards as it is and Id like the micro adjustment that on the 50d.
Ive also been itching to try out some macro photography or really close up photos as its something I've never tried yet.

So do I sell of the 70-200 and 1000d and invest in a 60d and a 100/50mm macro.

Sell up the 1000d and 18-250 and invest in a 50d and use the 70-200 more

or any other ideas as I'm a tad lost I don't want to be piling up stuff if I can help it.
 
Last edited:
Good call its been a long day I do indeed mean the 50d. Its something that been on my mind for a while now there's also the other voice which says that I might give wedding photography a go in a few years but Id rather have the 2.8 version.
 
To me you have all basis cover for focal lenghts so to me I would be looking to upgrade.
Sell the 18-250 and the 1000D and buy the 50d and keep the 70-200.

The 70-200 is a real decent piece of glass and one day you might just use it.

spike
 
Shame your 70-200 isn't the IS as I might of been tempted to offer a trade for my 100mm L f2.8 macro. I've just got an MP-E65 for macro and I'm a bit worried that the 100 wont get used enough and it's only a couple of months old. It's certainly a great lens for macro work and if thats the way you're going I'd highly recommend it.
 
modchild said:
Shame your 70-200 isn't the IS as I might of been tempted to offer a trade for my 100mm L f2.8 macro. I've just got an MP-E65 for macro and I'm a bit worried that the 100 wont get used enough and it's only a couple of months old. It's certainly a great lens for macro work and if thats the way you're going I'd highly recommend it.
Click to expand...

sorry to go OT, but I wouldn't sell or trade a 100L because you've got the MPE-65, it's a fabulous lens but extremely specialised, I know I would never want to be without the 1:4-1:1ish range that neither non-macros nor the MPE can cover.
I don't know a single MPE user who doesn't also use normal macro lenses on a regular basis :)
 
You know Adam, I think you might just be right. It would be a hell of a wrench to part with my 100L. I do use it quite a bit for other stuff.
 
Do you really need 2 bodies? I've only kept my old 20D because it is next to worthless.

If you hardly ever use the 70-200 range how often would you use a macro lens in that range? Or could you replace the 70 -200 with a ~100mm macro prime? I do this myself when I want to travel light, but personally I couldn't be without my 70 - 200, but at the end of the day it boils down to what you shot and how you feel your money is best spent.
 
Do you use the 18-250 much? Just asking as you've got a 17-50mm and youj've said you don't go long often.


Just thinking you could sell the 1000d, 70-200 and the 18-250, get either the 100mm canon or 150mm sigma (the 1:1 ratio macro one) and some AF tubes.

Only thinking of the "I'm not using these lenses". However, if the 70-200 is crisp and decent it may be worth keeping a hold of. Would possibly be useful in the wedding area for candid shots.

If you are unsure which lens, then I'd suggest hiring one/both as they usually aren't cheap.

Good luck! :)
 
Craikeybaby said:
Do you really need 2 bodies? I've only kept my old 20D because it is next to worthless.

If you hardly ever use the 70-200 range how often would you use a macro lens in that range? Or could you replace the 70 -200 with a ~100mm macro prime? I do this myself when I want to travel light, but personally I couldn't be without my 70 - 200, but at the end of the day it boils down to what you shot and how you feel your money is best spent.
Click to expand...

20d next to worthless?? Not at all, You could still get a couple of hundred quid for a good 20d!
 
The 18-250 was bought a couple years back when I naively thought it would be best to have an "all in one" and it now only comes out if I cba to take the full kit out last one was to legoland where I had two kids to keep an eye on so I reverted to "tourist" mode part from that it just sits collecting dust, I've literary got less than 500 shots on it since I bought it.

The 17-50 is the main lens along with the 11-16 they get used more than the rest the 70-200 only comes out when I need some extra reach (rarely). Yet Id feel empty without it and hate myself when I cant get that one shot.

In response to the two camera setup I seem to have it instilled in my mind its always best to have one as a backup and I cant get out of that mind set even though Im only on 7k shutter actuation on the 40d and 5k on the 1000d.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top