$1000 to spend... What lens should I buy?

S

semajha

Well-known member
I know I might get flamed for this because everyone is different and everyone has different needs but I'm mainly trying to get some ideas... I can't really say I have any particular style that I prefer shooting, since I'm a noob/hobbyist I kind of just shoot whatever I feel like shooting.

My current gear list:

Canon T2i
Manfrotto Tripod/701hdv fluid head
Letus Hawk VF
DIY IGUS slider

Lens:

Nikkor 50mm 1.4 AIS
Nikkor 24mm 2.8 AIS
Tokina 11-16mm 2.8

What i'm considering is the Canon 100mm 2.8L, however, I'm not sure if it would be worth the money. The original non-L 100mm is suppose to be sharper but I kind of want the image stabilization and faster auto focus because I plan on doing a bit of photography on the side. I've also considered the Tamron 17-50mm zoom lens after hearing so many good things about it but I'd like to stay a bit futureproof and buy lenses that can be used on FF bodies.(I know the tokina is only aps-c but that will be the last aps-c lens i'll ever buy)

So my question is, is the 100mm 2.8L worth it? Is there anyone on here who has this lens regret buying it? With $1000, what would you buy?
 
$1000 I would first sell the t2i, and buy a 60d or t3i.


Second I would have said tokina 11-16mm, but you already own it. I would seriously consider buying the sigma 30mm 1.4 as it is an AMAZING lens and with the 3x magnification from the t3i that can be your 100mm rite there. You lose a little quality but it still looks amazing!
 
I'm pretty happy with my t2i though, If I sell it then I probably won't get any more than $550(probably less). That means I have to spend another $250 for the t3i. I'm not gonna lie, articulate screen and zoom feature are VERY nice and I have recently started to consider it but I don't know... $250 is a lot of money to me.

And I've bought the Sigma 30mm 1.4 awhile back and was not impressed. Perhaps I got a lemon but images were too soft to me.

I really appreciate the input. Thanks.
 
semajha said:
I'm pretty happy with my t2i though, If I sell it then I probably won't get any more than $550(probably less). That means I have to spend another $250 for the t3i. I'm not gonna lie, articulate screen and zoom feature are VERY nice and I have recently started to consider it but I don't know... $250 is a lot of money to me.

And I've bought the Sigma 30mm 1.4 awhile back and was not impressed. Perhaps I got a lemon but images were too soft to me.

I really appreciate the input. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Soft? The Tokina lens is a lot softer. Heck if your looking for razor sharpness then get the cheap 50mm 1.8 lens. Also you have a $1000 to spend on a lens and you say $250 is to much for a better camera?

Good Luck
 
vision_filmz said:
Also you have a $1000 to spend on a lens and you say $250 is to much for a better camera?

Good Luck
Click to expand...

That $250 could be spent in much better ways. Really all you gain from a t3i is the articulating screen and the crop mode. The t2i has exactly the same video quality as the t3i.

Lenses last decades but new camera bodies come and go. In 11 months the t4i will probably be out and it might even have a better video processing chip. So that $250 he spent upgrading now will be completely wasted when he decides to upgrade again. With good lenses though, they stay with you through several body upgrades - and hold their value too. Better to put the money into the lenses and get the best he can now - that $250 might be the difference between buying an IS and a Non-IS version of a lens, or f/2.8 instead of an f/4 which means he won't need to buy another lens in 6 months time when he realises all his handheld footage is jittery or he is struggling in lowlight.


semajha said:
I've also considered the Tamron 17-50mm zoom lens after hearing so many good things about it but I'd like to stay a bit futureproof and buy lenses that can be used on FF bodies.(I know the tokina is only aps-c but that will be the last aps-c lens i'll ever buy)
Click to expand...

I wouldn't worry too much about this. Lenses hold their value much better than camera bodies so if you decide to go Full-frame you can easily sell your APS-C lenses without losing too much money, even several years down the track (some lenses actually appreciate in value; particularly with flactuating world currencies you can find overseas-manufactured products are suddenly worth a whole lot more than what you paid). If you can't bring yourself to buy APS-C only lenses, save a few more pennies and get the 24-70 f/2.8L - and you'll also need something to cover the 16-24mm range gap which is extremely useful on a APS-C camera. Otherwise, just get the Tamron 17-50.
 
deltoidjohn said:
That $250 could be spent in much better ways. Really all you gain from a t3i is the articulating screen and the crop mode. The t2i has exactly the same video quality as the t3i.

Lenses last decades but new camera bodies come and go. In 11 months the t4i will probably be out and it might even have a better video processing chip. So that $250 he spent upgrading now will be completely wasted when he decides to upgrade again. With good lenses though, they stay with you through several body upgrades - and hold their value too. Better to put the money into the lenses and get the best he can now - that $250 might be the difference between buying an IS and a Non-IS version of a lens, or f/2.8 instead of an f/4 which means he won't need to buy another lens in 6 months time when he realises all his handheld footage is jittery or he is struggling in lowlight.
Click to expand...

This post makes no sense, honestly no sense at all. The t3i is a better made camera than the t2i, for that reason alone it's worth an upgrade. Heck after using a swivel screen I could never go back to not owning it, further more that crop 3x and 10x is one of the best things ever invented, you seriously have no idea what you are talking about. Having a 30mm lens that can now act as a 90mm lens in 1080p, crazy.

Let me leave here as I feel like IM in the twilight zone
 
vision_filmz said:
This post makes no sense, honestly no sense at all. The t3i is a better made camera than the t2i, for that reason alone it's worth an upgrade.
Click to expand...

What do you mean "better made?" Do you mean better build quality? Better materials? Because it is exactly the same build quality as the t2i.


vision_filmz said:
Heck after using a swivel screen I could never go back to not owning it, further more that crop 3x and 10x is one of the best things ever invented, you seriously have no idea what you are talking about. Having a 30mm lens that can now act as a 90mm lens in 1080p, crazy.

Let me leave here as I feel like IM in the twilight zone
Click to expand...

You are completely right. I have no idea what I am talking about. Quality glass is useless and completely worthless unless you have the newest camera model currently available. In fact, the 5dmkII and 7d are completely worthless too as they were released several years ago and don't have all the newest tech. Same goes for the 1d & 1ds. Both junk. The t2i is worst of all. It's basically a $700 paper-weight now that the t3i is out.

Sarcasm aside, the 3x crop may be a cool feature for some. Others will never even use it. Likewise many people may find the articulating screen unnecessary because they already use a monitor or a loupe all the time anyway. I never use the LCD naked on any of my video cameras, my GH1, or the 550d's I shoot with because most of my work is outside in bright sunlight where you can barely see the screen no matter what angle you put it at - so for me a viewfinder or hoodloupe is a necessity and the articulating screen on a t3i would just be another possible breaking point in the cams design.

Please do not accuse me of not knowing what I am talking about. You have no idea what I do and don't know. You know nothing about me, so please don't throw out defamatory statements just because I disagree with your opinion.
 
I like magic lantern too much to "upgrade" to a t3i or 60D unless I totally need the swivel screen

returning to the main topic...
the tamron 17-50 non-vc is great but I think you've got that range already covered, and your primes probably deliver better images than a zoom could do

plus, I was going to suggest the tokina 11-16, but you already have that

above 50mm, what I own right now are a few vintage primes; all of them are great, and should come well below your budget:
* leitz elmarit-R 90mm f/2.8
* carl zeiss jena sonnar 135mm f/3.5 (today I'd go for the leitz elmarit-R 135mm f/2.8 instead)
* carl zeiss jena sonnar 180mm f/2.8
 
deltoidjohn said:
What do you mean "better made?" Do you mean better build quality? Better materials? Because it is exactly the same build quality as the t2i.




You are completely right. I have no idea what I am talking about. Quality glass is useless and completely worthless unless you have the newest camera model currently available. In fact, the 5dmkII and 7d are completely worthless too as they were released several years ago and don't have all the newest tech. Same goes for the 1d & 1ds. Both junk. The t2i is worst of all. It's basically a $700 paper-weight now that the t3i is out.

Sarcasm aside, the 3x crop may be a cool feature for some. Others will never even use it. Likewise many people may find the articulating screen unnecessary because they already use a monitor or a loupe all the time anyway. I never use the LCD naked on any of my video cameras, my GH1, or the 550d's I shoot with because most of my work is outside in bright sunlight where you can barely see the screen no matter what angle you put it at - so for me a viewfinder or hoodloupe is a necessity and the articulating screen on a t3i would just be another possible breaking point in the cams design.

Please do not accuse me of not knowing what I am talking about. You have no idea what I do and don't know. You know nothing about me, so please don't throw out defamatory statements just because I disagree with your opinion.
Click to expand...

You are totally missing the point and going somewhere else. No one said newer tech meant more than some nice glass, heck he even admitted himself that it would only cost $250 to upgrade his current camera to a better build and more functional t3i. He basically has all the short lenses covered and with the t3i 3x it could make all of his lenses have new life, please take some time and think about what I am saying. With an upgraded t3i it's like upgrading ALL of your lenses, that's why it's so amazing I have no idea why people do not see this. Having a 30mm prime that can double as a 90mm prime in a run and gun event while maybe not perfect is something I personally feel is amazing.

 
You might be better of with a Canon 85mm f1.8 or Canon 100mm f2.0 than the 100 mm f2.8L Macro. They're faster, have good optics, and of course are way cheaper. If you do a lot of product shots, close-up work, etc., you may need the macro lens. If not, I'd get the faster ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top