Planning to get another lens(es) Need some help!

[corei5]

So far I have my 18-55mm kit lens and 50mm f/1.8 with my 550D, I'm kinda getting the grip of my 50mm and now planning to get another lens for portrait photography, general-purpose photography and wildlife photography not much on landscapes because I don't normally go too far because I don't have a car to explore more places.

1) I really like portrait photography because I was planning to take a portrait photo of my family specially that there will be a new member coming somewhere in March I know its a long way to go.

2) I like going out with friends and family so far the only lens I can take for a day walk is either my kit lens or my 50mm lens and planning to upgrade it.

3) I'm starting to save up some money for my lens but really not decided yet if thats the lens I want. I was planning to get 55-250mm lens for wildlife photography but I saw that 70-200mm f/4L USM (although its not an IS lens but tripod will help, right?) is a great lens just need more at least £200. 70-200mm f4L USM is this even worth of buying with 550D or just for full frame camera's?

So if anyone can help me with these scenario i would really appreciate it.

Thank you

[WesternGuy]

So far I have my 18-55mm kit lens and 50mm f/1.8 with my 550D, I'm kinda getting the grip of my 50mm and now planning to get another lens for portrait photography, general-purpose photography and wildlife photography not much on landscapes because I don't normally go too far because I don't have a car to explore more places.

1) I really like portrait photography because I was planning to take a portrait photo of my family specially that there will be a new member coming somewhere in March I know its a long way to go.

2) I like going out with friends and family so far the only lens I can take for a day walk is either my kit lens or my 50mm lens and planning to upgrade it.

3) I'm starting to save up some money for my lens but really not decided yet if thats the lens I want. I was planning to get 55-250mm lens for wildlife photography but I saw that 70-200mm f/4L USM (although its not an IS lens but tripod will help, right?) is a great lens just need more at least £200. 70-200mm f4L USM is this even worth of buying with 550D or just for full frame camera's?

So if anyone can help me with these scenario i would really appreciate it.

Thank you

Well, it is often so hard to know what to do - so many lenses, so many choices.

I currently have a 5D with a 100-400mm zoom which I use for wildlife and it works fairly well for me, except there are times when I wish I had that 600 mm prime- not in my budget, yet...The 55-250 should give you both types of coverage that you are looking for, a portrait lens at the lower end and a reasonable wildlife lens at the top end and it extends the range of your kit lens. A lot depends on the IQ you get with it (the 55-250) fully extended and I have no experience with that. My 100-400 gives me great IQ over the entire range, with a bit of vignetting fully extended. My walk around lens is a 24-105 mm zoom and it covers the lower end for my 5D - from moderate wide angles at 24mm to low end telephoto at 105mm. It makes a fantastic portrait lens in the mid stages from about 70 to 90mm. While the 70-200mm is an L lens, but it won't have quite the reach that the 55-250 does, being about the equivalent of a 320mm on a full frame camera. Again, it comes back to what type of wildlife photography you want to do and how close you feel you need to be able to get to your wildlife subjects. I hope this helps a bit, but I am sure you will get all kinds of opinions from others as well. Maybe you can arrange to rent a lens, or two, for a weekend and give it/them a good workout to help you make your decision.

Cheers,

WesternGuy

[Photo-John]

I saw that 70-200mm f/4L USM (although its not an IS lens but tripod will help, right?) is a great lens just need more at least £200. 70-200mm f4L USM is this even worth of buying with 550D or just for full frame camera's?

Hell yeah it's worth buying for your 550D! I think every serious Canon photographer should own one of the 70-200mm L lenses. It's one of the best investments you can make. That lens will blow you away with its AF performance and image quality. The downside is it will spoil your other lenses for you

[corei5]

While the 70-200mm is an L lens, but it won't have quite the reach that the 55-250 does, being about the equivalent of a 320mm on a full frame camera. Again, it comes back to what type of wildlife photography you want to do and how close you feel you need to be able to get to your wildlife subjects. I hope this helps a bit, but I am sure you will get all kinds of opinions from others as well. Maybe you can arrange to rent a lens, or two, for a weekend and give it/them a good workout to help you make your decision.

55-250mm lens is equivalent to 320mm on full frame, right? what if its on cropped sensor like 550D, what is the equivalent of it? also the 70-200mm lens.

couple of people have said that 70-200mm is a great lens but i'm still pushing myself to read more about it before getting one.

[Photo-John]

couple of people have said that 70-200mm is a great lens but i'm still pushing myself to read more about it before getting one.

What else do you want to know? I've had the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L for well over 10 years - longer than any camera. And I've probably used it more than any other piece of photo gear I've ever owned. In my opinion, it's required equipment for serious Canon photographers. Any other lens is just a bad compromise that will eventually be replaced with the real deal.

[OldClicker]

What else do you want to know? I've had the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L for well over 10 years - longer than any camera. And I've probably used it more than any other piece of photo gear I've ever owned. In my opinion, it's required equipment for serious Canon photographers. Any other lens is just a bad compromise that will eventually be replaced with the real deal.

Unless it's the f/4 version which is a whole lot nicer to carry around. - Terry

[corei5]

Unless it's the f/4 version which is a whole lot nicer to carry around. - Terry

agree ... anyway how about my question though about the equivalent focal length of 70-200mm f4L on cropped body like 550D.

[OldClicker]

IMO, a 70-200mm lens on a cropped sensor body is a 70-200mm lens. The lens doesn't change and there is no magic involved to make it longer. The cropped sensor only uses ½ the area of the image (as compared to a ‘35mm’ sensor) so there is less in the viewfinder, but it’s not closer. - Terry

[Photo-John]

IMO, a 70-200mm lens on a cropped sensor body is a 70-200mm lens. The lens doesn't change and there is no magic involved to make it longer. The cropped sensor only uses ½ the area of the image (as compared to a ‘35mm’ sensor) so there is less in the viewfinder, but it’s not closer. - Terry

Sorry I glossed over the focal length. The Canon APS-C sensor cameras like your 550D have a 1.6x crop factor. That effectively makes a 70-200mm lens into a 112-320mm zoom.

And to follow up on OldClicker's comment - technically, the lens is still a 70-200. The true focal length and optical properties aren't changed by what is essentially an in-camera crop. However, even though the optical properties are the same, I still consider that my lenses are "effectively" converted on an APS-C sensor camera. That crop counts for me and it's part of the reason I've chosen to commit to the smaller sensor Canon cameras.

[corei5]

@Photo-John

Thank you for your reply about my question, that focal length seems alright I guess btw someone mentioned about the focal length of 55-250mm is equivalent of 320mm on full frame somewhere on the above posts so they're basically the same O_O.

While the 70-200mm is an L lens, but it won't have quite the reach that the 55-250 does, being about the equivalent of a 320mm on a full frame camer

a

[OldClicker]

Sorry I glossed over the focal length. The Canon APS-C sensor cameras like your 550D have a 1.6x crop factor. That effectively makes a 70-200mm lens into a 112-320mm zoom.

And to follow up on OldClicker's comment - technically, the lens is still a 70-200. The true focal length and optical properties aren't changed by what is essentially an in-camera crop. However, even though the optical properties are the same, I still consider that my lenses are "effectively" converted on an APS-C sensor camera. That crop counts for me and it's part of the reason I've chosen to commit to the smaller sensor Canon cameras.

And I can't help following up either. Talking about the 'effective focal length' as if something is actually different was the most confusing concept I encountered as a beginner two years ago until I figured out that chopping the center out of the image does nothing but make the image smaller. And I especially think it is wrong to suggest this as a reason for choosing one camera over another. - Terry

[Photo-John]

I understand, Terry. But maybe you need to see through my eyes. My camera choices are the Canon 7D, the EOS-1D Mk IV and the 5D Mk II. It's true I could crop 1D Mk IV or 5D Mk II images and get the same field of view. But what I can't do is ride my bike on 15 miles of technical terrain at 9000 feet of altitude with those cameras. And if I did, I'd have to carry a 300mm lens as well as those huge heavy cameras to get results comparable to what I get with my 7D and a 200mm lens. It's just not realistic or practical. My 7D also cost a lot less than either of those full frame cameras. So like I said, technically, you're absolutley right. But for practical purposes, I think the "digital conversion" is a legitimate factor. Especially if light weight, size and budget are worked into the equation.

[spiraleyes]

What else do you want to know? I've had the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L for well over 10 years - longer than any camera. And I've probably used it more than any other piece of photo gear I've ever owned. In my opinion, it's required equipment for serious Canon photographers. Any other lens is just a bad compromise that will eventually be replaced with the real deal.

Agreed, agreed! I love my f/2.8L. It may weigh a touch more than the f/4 versions, but I'll trade the extra weight for an extra stop

You can't go wrong with any version of the 70-200 L lenses, and there's no question that you'll keep and use it for a very long time.

[corei5]

In any cases this 70-200mm f4L is worth of buying even with cropped sensor cameras?

[OldClicker]

I understand, Terry. But maybe you need to see through my eyes. My camera choices are the Canon 7D, the EOS-1D Mk IV and the 5D Mk II. It's true I could crop 1D Mk IV or 5D Mk II images and get the same field of view. But what I can't do is ride my bike on 15 miles of technical terrain at 9000 feet of altitude with those cameras. And if I did, I'd have to carry a 300mm lens as well as those huge heavy cameras to get results comparable to what I get with my 7D and a 200mm lens. It's just not realistic or practical. My 7D also cost a lot less than either of those full frame cameras. So like I said, technically, you're absolutley right. But for practical purposes, I think the "digital conversion" is a legitimate factor. Especially if light weight, size and budget are worked into the equation.

(Sorry about hijacking your thread. I did make some, I hope, useful comments earlier.)

Price, absolutely (and very important). Weight/size - Usually, but a 5D weighs less than the 7D. You can get the same shot on the full frame as you can on the APS with the 200mm lens - OR - you could always just use some tape to cover up 3/4 [EDIT - sorry, 1/2] of the area of a 100mm lens, get the same image and your kit would be lighter and cheaper yet.

I understand that the overall feature set of the 7D makes it a great choice for what you are doing, but I just cannot see equivilant focal length as a valid reason for choosing a camera.

Terry

[Photo-John]

Agreed, agreed! I love my f/2.8L. It may weigh a touch more than the f/4 versions, but I'll trade the extra weight for an extra stop

I've thought about doing the exact opposite - trading the extra stop for a smaller lighter lens. I know of a few pro snowsports photographers who have done just that so they can lighten their load in the backcountry.

[OldClicker]

In any cases this 70-200mm f4L is worth of buying even with cropped sensor cameras?

Yes, absolutely. I switched to Sony and I have a Canon 70-200 f/4 L. I kept a Canon body and this one lens. - Terry

[Photo-John]

Yes, absolutely. I switched to Sony and I have a Canon 70-200 f/4 L. I kept a Canon body and this one lens. - Terry

How about *that* for a testimonial. And I'll add another. My dad got my old Canon EOS 3 and then my 40D. He only bought one lens. Can you guess which one?

Canon 70-200 f/4L

[corei5]

Thanks guys even though you two hi-jacked my thread, i will start saving for this lens also this lens comes with the hood, right, except tripod ring.

[WesternGuy]

55-250mm lens is equivalent to 320mm on full frame, right? what if its on cropped sensor like 550D, what is the equivalent of it? also the 70-200mm lens.

couple of people have said that 70-200mm is a great lens but i'm still pushing myself to read more about it before getting one.

corei5, that is what I meant when I said the 55-250 is like my putting a 320mm lens on my 5D. Because the 550D is a cropped sensor, the field of view, fully extended to 250mm, that you see is equivalent to what I would see on a 320mm lens mounted on my full-frame camera. Does that help clarify things. Sorry if I didn't make myself clear in my initial response.

Cheers,

WesternGuy

[corei5]

so the field of view of 70-200mm is equivalent to 250mm?

[Photo-John]

so the field of view of 70-200mm is equivalent to 250mm?

Multiply by 1.6 for Canon cameras - 320mm at the long end. But yeah - field-of-view is what actually changes. The depth-of-field and other optical quality will be the same as if you had it mounted on a full frame camera. If you want more depth-of-field ten that's a good thing. If you want less, then it's a bad thing. That's one reason portrait photographers can benefit from a full-frame camera.

[corei5]

oh sad thing I don't own full frame camera maybe somewhere in the future I will upgrade to full frame.

Is there any other way to get more DOF using this 70-200 or 55-250 on a cropped sensor cameras? (thinkin move further from the subject?)

[Photo-John]

I think you misunderstood me. You get more depth-of-field with the crop sensor camera and less with the fulll frame. For me and my 7D this is good. It gives me more DOF focus padding when I'm shooting a mountain biker or skier in action.

[CaraRose]

Hell yeah it's worth buying for your 550D! I think every serious Canon photographer should own one of the 70-200mm L lenses. It's one of the best investments you can make. That lens will blow you away with its AF performance and image quality. The downside is it will spoil your other lenses for you

I rented it (f/4 IS) and while I think it was a great lens, the range just happens to be one I rarely use, and decided it would probably be a waste for me to spend money on it. I guess I just tend to want the extremes of wide or long

I own the 55-250 and got a lot of great use out of it, but IQ is nothing compared to the L lenses.