Best Photojournalistic Zoom Lens for Digital Rebel?

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
As a side job, I video wedding days journalistically and make pretty decent money editing and burning them to DVD on my iMac. So I've got a little extra cash now that is burning a hole in my pocket....



I have been long contemplating getting a digital still camera to play around with to get a little into the "still photography" side of things. After much cogitation, I have settled on the Digital Rebel.



I have been reading some good books on wedding photojournalism and am intrugued by the possibilities. I know just enough about still photography to be dangerous, if even that.



I already have a 28mm-80mm lens that came with my (hardly ever used) film Rebel I purchased a couple of years ago.



My question is this: I know I will want a good zoom lens to get, in particular, very tight shots of the bride's face (showing her emotion) throughout the day.



What (reasonably priced) lens would you suggest for this?



In my reading, it appears that a wedding photojournalist's most trusted lens is an 80mm-200mm. Also, being an extreme novice, I am still confused somewhat by f-stops, etc. But I gather I would want one with a lower number as that would allow more light in and would take "better" photos (or be "faster"?), but would be more expensive.



Please give me your lens suggestions and educate me a little (or a lot) on what I might be after.



Thanks in advance for all of your assistance. I always really appreciate your help!

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    70-200L would be a great lens.



    Also, a lot of wedding photographers use primes for portrait lens.



    The Canon "cheapie" 50mm is one of their best lenses and is super cheap (under 70 bucks)







    Depending on how close you need, the 100-400L IS is an awesome lens. Also, Canon just came out with the EF-70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM which is supposed to be great.



    Lastly, many people refer to the 28-135 IS lens to be the best all-around lens..



    In your case, the IS models could definitely come in handy (get 2 full stops back) in low light like in churches, etc..



    It all really comes down to how much zoom you want, how fast you want the lens, and what scenarios you will be shooting in (no tripod, using IS, etc..)



    and of course, how much you want to spend.

  • Reply 2 of 16
    Slackula,



    Having a 'fast' lens (i.e. low 'f number') will mean that you can get shots with shallow depth of field, which is usually good for portraits.



    SCARECROW's suggestions are all very good lenses, but some of them are not cheap . The 100-400, 70-300 DO IS, 28-300 IS and the f2.8 versions of the 70-200 will all cost over $1000 (£1000 here in the UK - so much for exchange rates ). However, the f4 version of the 70-200 is significantly cheaper (I guess around $600 in the US), and is still one of their top lenses.



    On the 'reasonably priced' side, I agree with SCARECROW about the 50/1.8 and 28-135 IS. The 50/1.8 is reckoned to be one of the best value lenses that Canon make - very sharp, and very cheap . I don't have one yet, but I'm thinking about picking one up. And don't forget, with the Digital Rebel's 1.6x field of view crop, this will appear like an 80mm lens . I do have the 28-135, and find its a great all-round lens. On the long side you will be able to get some close head shots, plus the image stabiliser really can be a lifesaver .



    I would recommend having a look at DP Review - they have some very active forums, including one for the Digital Rebel/300D and one for Canon SLR lenses. Just browsing and searching should bring up loads of info on the subject .



    Hope this helps .



    Dave.
  • Reply 3 of 16
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Quote:

    Having a 'fast' lens (i.e. low 'f number') will mean that you can get shots with shallow depth of field, which is usually good for portraits.



    Good for portraits...good for getting the most out of available light, such as indoor events where flashes would make you a villain, Slackula. I've mostly seen wedding photographers with 50mm and 85mm primes or a fast midrange zoom (F/2.8) and possibly a large zoom like the 70-200mm. If the location is scenic, I'd guess you'd want to pack something wider.



    Quote:

    SCARECROW's suggestions are all very good lenses, but some of them are not cheap . The 100-400, 70-300 DO IS, 28-300 IS and the f2.8 versions of the 70-200 will all cost over $1000 (£1000 here in the UK - so much for exchange rates ). However, the f4 version of the 70-200 is significantly cheaper (I guess around $600 in the US), and is still one of their top lenses.



    The 70-200mm F/2.8 IS is a sharp, sharp, sharp lens. I don't know if the F/4 version will fast enough. I've found that the F/2.8 is very good wide open, but most zoom lenses aren't happy at max aperture. I've never handled the F/4, so I don't know.



    I'm guessing the new DO lens won't be fantastic for the majority of indoor work, but instead it should be a very general purpose lens, though expensive. (hiking, travelling light, wandering, whatever)



    Quote:

    On the 'reasonably priced' side, I agree with SCARECROW about the 50/1.8 and 28-135 IS. The 50/1.8 is reckoned to be one of the best value lenses that Canon make - very sharp, and very cheap . I don't have one yet, but I'm thinking about picking one up. And don't forget, with the Digital Rebel's 1.6x field of view crop, this will appear like an 80mm lens . I do have the 28-135, and find its a great all-round lens. On the long side you will be able to get some close head shots, plus the image stabiliser really can be a lifesaver .



    Yes, everybody who owns a Digital Rebel should get a 50mm F/1.8. It's a no-brainer, and would be very close to the old film standard focal length of 85mm for portraits.



    I'd say save up for the 70-200mm F/2.8. It's worth it. Once you get that, you'll be covered for most things. One thing Canon sorely needs is a wide zoom lens for its 1.3x and 1.6x crop digitals.
  • Reply 4 of 16
    Thanks for all of the suggestions thus far, and more comments are always welcome!



    As always, you have been a great help!
  • Reply 5 of 16
    We just bought a Digital Rebel a few months ago and love it. We got it with the supplied lens (18-55mm) and we bought the 28-135mm IS. The 28-135mm is a great lens. According to a detailed review I read somewhere it has very good sharpness across a wide range of zoom values.



    The biggest problem you will have is getting enough light. Probably not a problem when everyone steps outdoors but a problem when you are trying to take candid shots indoors without a tripod. Unless you spend a ton of money the zoom lenses are not fast. Compared to other cameras the Rebel is great at this because it is so low noise. You can push it to ISO 800 and still get a great picture.



    If you do get this I suggest becoming familiar with the custom white balance. When working with uncertain, indoor incandescent lights this can be a life saver.



    One of the things most often recommended for this camera is a good flash (canon Speedlight). The built in flash is OK for short range but in a large room it doesn't suffice. We didn't get it yet but I can understand how it would be really useful.
  • Reply 6 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally posted by neutrino23

    If you do get this I suggest becoming familiar with the custom white balance. When working with uncertain, indoor incandescent lights this can be a life saver.



    Or shoot RAW instead of JPEG. That way you can worry about white balance later .



    Dave.
  • Reply 7 of 16
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Dave Abrey

    Or shoot RAW instead of JPEG. That way you can worry about white balance later .



    Dave.




    Yeah, unless you have deadlines to cover, there's no reason to give up the versatility of RAW to shoot in a faster format to process like TIFF or JPEG. And if you have a nice large card, you can shoot in RAW+JPEG mode if you camera supports it.
  • Reply 8 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Eugene

    Yeah, unless you have deadlines to cover, there's no reason to give up the versatility of RAW to shoot in a faster format to process like TIFF or JPEG. And if you have a nice large card, you can shoot in RAW+JPEG mode if you camera supports it.



    Good point, I'd forgotten that it will be for wedding shoots, so deadlines could well be an issue.



    Dave.
  • Reply 9 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Eugene

    [...]

    The 70-200mm F/2.8 IS is a sharp, sharp, sharp lens. I don't know if the F/4 version will fast enough. I've found that the F/2.8 is very good wide open, but most zoom lenses aren't happy at max aperture. I've never handled the F/4, so I don't know.

    [...]

    Yes, everybody who owns a Digital Rebel should get a 50mm F/1.8. It's a no-brainer, and would be very close to the old film standard focal length of 85mm for portraits.

    [...]

    I'd say save up for the 70-200mm F/2.8. It's worth it. Once you get that, you'll be covered for most things. One thing Canon sorely needs is a wide zoom lens for its 1.3x and 1.6x crop digitals.



    I have the 50 mm f1.8, 24-70mm f2.8L, and the 70-200mm f4.0L for my EOS 10D.



    Once I bought the 24-70, I've never used the 50 mm. Since the quality of the 24-70 is higher than the 50, I just bump the ISO higher. That said, the 50 mm is still an excellent bargain and a good lens.



    As for the 70-200, I would agree with Eugene and get the 70-200 IS f2.8L, although it's about 3x the cost of my lens, and especially if you're taking pictures indoors. My 4.0 is a great outdoor lens, but I just like the flexibility of being able to go down to f2.8. The IS (image stabilization) is good for an f-stop, if I recall.
  • Reply 10 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally posted by GardenOfEarthlyDelights

    I have the 50 mm f1.8, 24-70mm f2.8L, and the 70-200mm f4.0L for my EOS 10D.



    wish I had some L lenses .



    Quote:

    Once I bought the 24-70, I've never used the 50 mm. Since the quality of the 24-70 is higher than the 50, I just bump the ISO higher. That said, the 50 mm is still an excellent bargain and a good lens.



    Well, I finally picked up a 50/1.8 today, so hopefully I'll be able to give it a run out soon. I already have the focal length covered by the 28-135 IS, but that's slow - there's no way you'd get the shallow depth of field that you would with the 50/1.8. As you've used on before, what's the image quality like? Do you think it will be as good as or better than with the 28-135?



    Quote:

    As for the 70-200, I would agree with Eugene and get the 70-200 IS f2.8L, although it's about 3x the cost of my lens, and especially if you're taking pictures indoors. My 4.0 is a great outdoor lens, but I just like the flexibility of being able to go down to f2.8. The IS (image stabilization) is good for an f-stop, if I recall.



    The 70-200 IS lens is one of my dream buys . I've heard so many good things about it. According to Canon, the IS on those lenses is good for 'approximately 3 stops of shutter speed' . I need this lens .



    Dave.
  • Reply 11 of 16
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Dave Abrey



    Well, I finally picked up a 50/1.8 today, so hopefully I'll be able to give it a run out soon. I already have the focal length covered by the 28-135 IS, but that's slow - there's no way you'd get the shallow depth of field that you would with the 50/1.8. As you've used on before, what's the image quality like? Do you think it will be as good as or better than with the 28-135?




    The 50mm F/1.8 is the cheapest lens in the line-up because it's the simplest design and therefore incredibly easy to manufacture. It's easily the sharpest Canon lens I've ever used, even sharper than the F/1.4.
  • Reply 12 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Dave Abrey

    As you've used on before, what's the image quality like? Do you think it will be as good as or better than with the 28-135?



    L lenses rock.



    I've compared my 24-70 mm L-lens against the 50 mm, as engineers are wont to do. At 100%, it's hard to notice the difference (especially with my eyesight). I have to zoom it to notice the difference, but it's easily noticeable at 2x.



    Of course, the 24-70 mm cost 10 times the 50 mm, so it better be good.
  • Reply 13 of 16
    EF 17-40 f/4L USM She's a Sweet lens







    And remember that it in a relationship of x1.3 (aprox) from digital to a standard lens. And don't worry about the brightness of the lens if your shooting digital. It will be fine. Infact with the wider angle lenses one should be stopped down any way...
  • Reply 14 of 16
    Sorry, I'm a Nikon user bumping into this discussion, but what does the "L" designation of Canon lenses mean that is so significant? It can't just be like the Nikon "D" lenses that have a CPU to send distance info. to the camera for TTL metering/focus, or is it?
  • Reply 15 of 16
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by fred_lj

    Sorry, I'm a Nikon user bumping into this discussion, but what does the "L" designation of Canon lenses mean that is so significant? It can't just be like the Nikon "D" lenses that have a CPU to send distance info. to the camera for TTL metering/focus, or is it?



    "L" does not refer to a specific feature, AFAIK. It just designates a lens as being a cut above the others. Typically an "L" lens has UD (ultra-low dispersion) and fluorite elements.
  • Reply 16 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally posted by fred_lj

    Sorry, I'm a Nikon user bumping into this discussion,



    No harm, Looks like the post above me answered the question about the L vs ED ect...



    Nikon a great system, I own lots of it to.. (Film versions) The Canon systems have gained great strides in the digital department...



    When purchasing a camera, and the lenses... The lenses and user interface are what will keep you tied or loyal to a brand... When buying a system, perhaps splurge on the lens and figure you'll be getting a new body within a few years anyway... at that point.. you will have good quality lens to put on your newer body...
Sign In or Register to comment.