sboerup Online Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On
|
p.1 #19 · katie & dennis | 12.20.08 | |
Andrew, about the equipment. I agree, for the most part if I'm outdoors, most lenses will perform admirably and quite comparably. The 24 2.8 will be just as sharp, less DOF, and many other reasons why cheaper lenses aren't in my bag. As you understand a lot of my work is with weddings, and I need fast glass for reception work. I don't necessarily buy them because they are fast (but of course, the 24/50/85 are the main purpose I bought them), but other than being fast, they are: sharper, better bokeh (quite significantly so on the 85 and 50L, the bokeh is unlike any other lenses), accurate AF, build quality, residual value, etc . . .
I could get cheaper, but I will still need fast 1.2 / 1.4 glass anyways, so no point to having 2 sets of lenses. I prefer primes over zooms, but both find their need in my bag. 17-40 is an excellent lens, and great value as well.
I used to buy and sell lenses like an addict . . . I was always trying out new gear and selling the stuff I didn't find I particularly liked. If it's in my bag, it's deserved it's space there . . . and all my lenses have been well tested and compared to many other lenses (including Tamron and Sigmas) and I kept these ones because they were the best for my needs.
Now that the 5D2 allows you to shoot at higher ISO without so much thought about more noise (even at 1600), but the lower ISO the better for me and my style. Prime lenses arent so much needed anymore, but, my 24 1.4L stopped down to 2.8 is almost as sharp as the 85L (which I just discovered how good it was). I never cared for the 24-70 . . . the sharpness, bokeh and speed of the primes is leagues ahead in my book.
|