cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

lens advice:

Penguin
New Contributor

I am planning to take a trip to Eastern Europe soon and want to document the places and people along my route.  I'm going to pack my Rebel XT, a 70 - 300 mm lens and an 85 mm lens.    I am asking the community to offer any lens advice, that is, should I pack these lenses, should I invest in another focal length lens, or invest in a lens to add to my what I plan to bring?

The trip will be 10 days in length and I probably will not have a large amount ot time to capture all that I would like to.

Any thoughts (pro or con) would be greatly appreciated.....

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION


@Penguin wrote:

Thanks for the advice... I have a 18-55 mm already.... ? 10-20 mm also?


At a minimum, I would recommend a wide angle lens, preferably a super wide angle like the 10-20mm.  You probably do not want to carry more than 2-3 lenses.  

 

I would also recommend taking a fast narrow aperture lens, f/2.8 or faster, for indoor shots.  The built-in flash is only useful with your 18-55mm, but you cannot use a flash everywhere.  Sometimes you do not want to use one, because the natural light is what really makes the scene.  The 85mm would be fast enough, but it could be a little too long indoors.  

 

The EF-S 24mm would be nearly ideal.  It is wide enough for capturing entire scenes, indoors and out.  It is fast enough to use indoors without a flash, and it will not get in the way of the flash, casting a shadow, should you decide to use the built-in flash.

On your APS-C sensor body, the 70-300mm is not exactly a walk around, taking in the sights in tourist mode, type of a lens.  Since you know your itinerary better than me, I say take it along.  I like the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM better, though, because of its’ wide aperture.  But, I am not a fan of that lens, because it does not seem to focus consistently enough to be useful wider than f/2.8.

 

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Doctor told me to get out and walk, so I bought a Canon."

View solution in original post

6 REPLIES 6

Wolfie0827
Frequent Contributor

The 85mm lens seems a bit redundant with 70-300mm. But I would add a wider angle lens for those landsccape/ crowd photos suck as an 18-55mm lens. It will give you more choices for framing the shot.

 

Thanks for the advice... I have a 18-55 mm already.... ? 10-20 mm also?

Wolfie0827
Frequent Contributor

That would depemd on your needs, if you plan on some real close macro shots then you might want the 10-20mm but I think for most things the 18-55mm and the 70-300mm would cover it. Part of what to take will also depend on how much you want to carry around and whether you have the capacity to have all of it with you (Camera bag size). A lens kept in the hotol room does you no good on your outdoor excursion.

 


@Penguin wrote:

Thanks for the advice... I have a 18-55 mm already.... ? 10-20 mm also?


At a minimum, I would recommend a wide angle lens, preferably a super wide angle like the 10-20mm.  You probably do not want to carry more than 2-3 lenses.  

 

I would also recommend taking a fast narrow aperture lens, f/2.8 or faster, for indoor shots.  The built-in flash is only useful with your 18-55mm, but you cannot use a flash everywhere.  Sometimes you do not want to use one, because the natural light is what really makes the scene.  The 85mm would be fast enough, but it could be a little too long indoors.  

 

The EF-S 24mm would be nearly ideal.  It is wide enough for capturing entire scenes, indoors and out.  It is fast enough to use indoors without a flash, and it will not get in the way of the flash, casting a shadow, should you decide to use the built-in flash.

On your APS-C sensor body, the 70-300mm is not exactly a walk around, taking in the sights in tourist mode, type of a lens.  Since you know your itinerary better than me, I say take it along.  I like the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM better, though, because of its’ wide aperture.  But, I am not a fan of that lens, because it does not seem to focus consistently enough to be useful wider than f/2.8.

 

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Doctor told me to get out and walk, so I bought a Canon."

View solution in original post

ScottyP
Respected Contributor

I agree on the EFS 20mm f/2.8. Good focal length and a nice wide aperture for low light and shallow DOF which it sounds like you don't have. 

Scott

Canon 5d mk 4, Canon 6D, EF 70-200mm L f/2.8 IS mk2; EF 16-35 f/2.8 L mk. III; Sigma 35mm f/1.4 "Art" EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro; EF 85mm f/1.8; EF 1.4x extender mk. 3; EF 24-105 f/4 L; EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS; 3x Phottix Mitros+ speedlites

Why do so many people say "FER-tographer"? Do they take "fertographs"?

ebiggs1
Forum Elite

I would sell all the lenses you currently have and buy the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens.

 Maybe add a Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Lens if you must have a bit l;onger reach.  But you probably won't need it.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and several lenses!