Spendin' da Moneyz!
- Thread starter t5Nitro
- Start date
TriggerHappyDude
New member
What would I spend on a gently used set of 24-70 and 70-200?
Are these the L series you have?
Are these the L series you have?
TitusvileSurfer
New member
By they way did anyone watch the North Carolina vs. Michigan State NCAA tournament game tonight? Did you notice the photographers on the sidelines?
Canon 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8...
Canon 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8...
TriggerHappyDude
New member
I'm scared to ask what the 24 - 70 and 70 - 200 lenses cost...
TitusvileSurfer
New member
The 70-200 f/2.8 IS goes for $1,699.00 new
You could find a gently used for $1500.00 easy...less gets exponentially harder to find.
The 24-70 goes for $1,190.00 new
You could find a gently used for about $1000...less gets exponentially harder to find.
So together you are looking at $2500 used for what I would consider the going rate (good condition).
If you get one that's somehow tainted the price can fall fast...but so does what you get out of it.
You could find a gently used for $1500.00 easy...less gets exponentially harder to find.
The 24-70 goes for $1,190.00 new
You could find a gently used for about $1000...less gets exponentially harder to find.
So together you are looking at $2500 used for what I would consider the going rate (good condition).
If you get one that's somehow tainted the price can fall fast...but so does what you get out of it.
TriggerHappyDude
New member
Like this one?
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=673584
I don't get the cashback stuff?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&item=170318651600
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=673584
I don't get the cashback stuff?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&item=170318651600
TitusvileSurfer
New member
Yeah that looks about right. If you trust the seller go for it. I would check out POTN as well. They have a good buy/sell section.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=88
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=14
Don't forget there are many versions of the 70-200 (four of them!)
The 70-200 f/2.8 IS is what I have. It is also the most expensive.
70-200 f/2.8 IS ...$1,699.00 (new)
70-200 f/2.8........$1,190.00
70-200 f/4 IS.......$1,100
70-200 f/4...........$600.00
The 70-200 f/2.8 IS is great for low light. If the sun is shining the f/4 is just fine though at 1/3 the price. I do recommend IS for the 70-200 though. I really find it helps, especially with an f/4.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=88
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=14
Don't forget there are many versions of the 70-200 (four of them!)
The 70-200 f/2.8 IS is what I have. It is also the most expensive.
70-200 f/2.8 IS ...$1,699.00 (new)
70-200 f/2.8........$1,190.00
70-200 f/4 IS.......$1,100
70-200 f/4...........$600.00
The 70-200 f/2.8 IS is great for low light. If the sun is shining the f/4 is just fine though at 1/3 the price. I do recommend IS for the 70-200 though. I really find it helps, especially with an f/4.
Last edited:
TriggerHappyDude
New member
Yeah thats where I got the ebay link from, the POTN site.
He wants a 50mm Prime lens, what would that be good for? Portraits?
This seller is moving to the "Prime" side, not the dark side.
Which I learned from you all means no zooming, just a set fixed mm such as 50mm etc...and dark side is Nikon, wait I didn't mean that.
Some decent deals I guess...
http://photography.shop.ebay.com/it...&_trksid=p3286.m270.l1313&_odkw=&_osacat=3323
He wants a 50mm Prime lens, what would that be good for? Portraits?
This seller is moving to the "Prime" side, not the dark side.
Which I learned from you all means no zooming, just a set fixed mm such as 50mm etc...and dark side is Nikon, wait I didn't mean that.
Some decent deals I guess...
http://photography.shop.ebay.com/it...&_trksid=p3286.m270.l1313&_odkw=&_osacat=3323
Last edited:
TitusvileSurfer
New member
Hahahaha you're alright man, you're alright.
Prime lenses don't zoom. If you were buying a 5DmkII and prime lenses, I would be suggesting....
35mm f/1.4
50mm f/1.2 or f/1.4
85mm f/1.2 and/or f/1.8
135mm f/2
ect...
Prime lenses don't zoom. If you were buying a 5DmkII and prime lenses, I would be suggesting....
35mm f/1.4
50mm f/1.2 or f/1.4
85mm f/1.2 and/or f/1.8
135mm f/2
ect...
Last edited:
TriggerHappyDude
New member
Guess I'm going to have to go into my local camera store and check both of these lenses out now, I can't make a decision!
TitusvileSurfer
New member
Prime lenses are really neat. They are often individually higher quality with each lens costing less money. By the time you have all the lenses you typically spend a lot more though....and you have huge gaps in your mm range because...well...you can't zoom in or out. Primers zoom by walking closer or farther away to what they are shooting.
TriggerHappyDude
New member
Right...and those are all really fast due to the f/1.x number, so most often natural light is good and no flash is needed with these. I wonder if one of those would be good for me to start with? I have to build my collection of lenses somewhere, just where though...Prime or Zoom?
TriggerHappyDude
New member
This is what I thought. So thats something else for me to mull over...and so the 35mm would be good for sort of close shots, 50mm would get me out a bit farther, and so on...out...as the number gets higher?
Also I've heard the Sigma's are hard to beat and very comparable with the Canon, but something about me having an off Canon brand kicks in my OCD...
TitusvileSurfer
New member
Lots of people mix and match
I have:
10-22 f/3.5-4.5 *does not work on a 5D
24-70 f/2.8
50mm f/1.4
70-200 f/2.8 IS
100mm f/2.8 (macro)
So I have 3 zooms and 2 primes. I also have 10mm-200mm (20x zoom) covered with the sole exception of 23mm. Oh well I can back up or walk forward two steps if I really have to I guess.
The mm effects the perception, so it really is more complicated than that, which is why I like to choose between a broad range of options.
50mm is awesome. Everyone needs the capability to shoot 50mm. Wether you have a 50mm f/1.2, 24-70, 24-105, or whatever...you need 50mm.
50mm matches the perception of what the human eye sees. If you are standing in front Niagra Falls and I took a picture of you with a 50mm lens, you and the water fall would look the same size in the picture as you do in real life.
If I took a picture of you at 10mm, you would look much bigger than the waterfall than you actually would in real life.
If I took a picture of you at 200mm, you would look much smaller than the waterfall than you actually would in real life.
It's a big deal. This makes up the *very basics* of when you hear people say "oh they just used photography tricks to do that". It gets a lot more complicated an exciting but the photographer owns the right to distort reality to his will for someone who may not understand how photography works (99.98% of the population).
I have:
10-22 f/3.5-4.5 *does not work on a 5D
24-70 f/2.8
50mm f/1.4
70-200 f/2.8 IS
100mm f/2.8 (macro)
So I have 3 zooms and 2 primes. I also have 10mm-200mm (20x zoom) covered with the sole exception of 23mm. Oh well I can back up or walk forward two steps if I really have to I guess.
The mm effects the perception, so it really is more complicated than that, which is why I like to choose between a broad range of options.
50mm is awesome. Everyone needs the capability to shoot 50mm. Wether you have a 50mm f/1.2, 24-70, 24-105, or whatever...you need 50mm.
50mm matches the perception of what the human eye sees. If you are standing in front Niagra Falls and I took a picture of you with a 50mm lens, you and the water fall would look the same size in the picture as you do in real life.
If I took a picture of you at 10mm, you would look much bigger than the waterfall than you actually would in real life.
If I took a picture of you at 200mm, you would look much smaller than the waterfall than you actually would in real life.
It's a big deal. This makes up the *very basics* of when you hear people say "oh they just used photography tricks to do that". It gets a lot more complicated an exciting but the photographer owns the right to distort reality to his will for someone who may not understand how photography works (99.98% of the population).
Last edited:
TriggerHappyDude
New member
That what I plan to do! Mix and Match, but its what to START with as my first lens...thats the trouble I'm having, I think the 24 - 70 is a good place to start, you all have educated me on this tonight.
I love your list, I might just keep it handy and build my collection off it, its a nice range of lenses there! What body do you shoot with?
So I could purchase the lenses in this order...
24-70 f/2.8 - starter lens
100mm f/2.8 (macro) - for my tank
70-200 f/2.8 IS - give me some range
50mm f/1.4 - another solid Prime beauty lens
I love your list, I might just keep it handy and build my collection off it, its a nice range of lenses there! What body do you shoot with?
So I could purchase the lenses in this order...
24-70 f/2.8 - starter lens
100mm f/2.8 (macro) - for my tank
70-200 f/2.8 IS - give me some range
50mm f/1.4 - another solid Prime beauty lens
Last edited:
TriggerHappyDude
New member
Thanks for all your help TitusvileSurfer, you're aiight too!
TitusvileSurfer
New member
I agree that that the 24-70 should be your first lens. It just can't be beat, especially with a 5DmkII. If you are going to get a camera like that it would be a shame not to have a worthy lens (which is why they offer the 24-105 at a discount together).
I agree that the 100mm f/2.8 is a solid next purchase and the 70-200 a logical 3rd.
The 50mm f/1.4 is an excellent lens. I own it. I love it. I have a very specific purpose for it, and that is shooting hardcore screamer bands at indoor skate parks and all you can drink for $10 bars. I very seldom use the 50mm f/1.4 because...well...I have a 24-70, I don't want to use the 50mm prime unless I NEED to.
If I had a 5DmkII with your super swave ISO capabilities, I wouldn't ever need to use it!
I have a 40D by the way. If I could use one lens for the rest of my life it would be the 24-70, so I think that is a great first one to secure.
I agree that the 100mm f/2.8 is a solid next purchase and the 70-200 a logical 3rd.
The 50mm f/1.4 is an excellent lens. I own it. I love it. I have a very specific purpose for it, and that is shooting hardcore screamer bands at indoor skate parks and all you can drink for $10 bars. I very seldom use the 50mm f/1.4 because...well...I have a 24-70, I don't want to use the 50mm prime unless I NEED to.
If I had a 5DmkII with your super swave ISO capabilities, I wouldn't ever need to use it!
I have a 40D by the way. If I could use one lens for the rest of my life it would be the 24-70, so I think that is a great first one to secure.
TriggerHappyDude
New member
Funny, I want to shoot some of my local musicians as well, that is one of the subjects I didn't mention that I eventually would like to get into. Bands, Folk Musicians, the acoustic guitar players, whatever...but you don't think I'd ever need/use a 50mm?
24 - 70 mm it is! I feel good about it, after reading some reviews and your posts and others...thanks!
24 - 70 mm it is! I feel good about it, after reading some reviews and your posts and others...thanks!
TriggerHappyDude
New member
I just realized, I might have hijacked this thread, and I do truly apologize! I know we are talking about spending the money but I hope the OP doesn't get offended.
TitusvileSurfer
New member
Well if you are going to shoot bands, folk musicians, and acoustic guitar players, you may put one to good use. I bought mine specifically for that purpose...that is its designated job. Your camera gives you more elbow room than mine does. I don't like shooting at super high ISO speeds, but if I had a 5DmkII it wouldn't bother me nearly as much.
Get the 24-70 and get a good feel for what you are doing. Shoot some performances with it. If you need a 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.2, or whatever else...you will know who what where when how and why all by yourself.
Just because you have a super fast aperture doesn't mean you get to skimp on flash. Speed lights are awesome. You don't always add light because you HAVE to add light. More times than not you add light because it will improve the scene. You can create shadows, eliminate shadows, make the sky brighter, or all sorts of other tricks. It won't be urgent, but down the road you will want a 580exII or something similar.
Get the 24-70 and get a good feel for what you are doing. Shoot some performances with it. If you need a 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.2, or whatever else...you will know who what where when how and why all by yourself.
Just because you have a super fast aperture doesn't mean you get to skimp on flash. Speed lights are awesome. You don't always add light because you HAVE to add light. More times than not you add light because it will improve the scene. You can create shadows, eliminate shadows, make the sky brighter, or all sorts of other tricks. It won't be urgent, but down the road you will want a 580exII or something similar.
