Since i have a Nikon 5000 film scanner - the F3 is staying part of the arsenal. The worst part of it is the scanning - but it does such a good job that i could shoot either platform and feel good about the results. i absolutely love my ƒ 2 180mm nikor prime and i have the ƒ 2 24mm nikor as well that is one of the best Nikon lenses ever made. I think i even have a 22mm Nikor that I remember shooting a lot with.
You're right about setting up your shots and finding good angles with primes - you have to - or else you get really lousy shots... i just don't like to walk that much! There is a place for both lenses and lets say - in a wedding or event - sometimes you're very limited as to where you can stand or what angle you can shoot from - so a prime is just out of the question. If you're going to do events or weddings or anything that has you limited in any way -and that is a lot of paying gigs - you just have to settle with a zoom. Sometimes its not as much about the art as it is about delivering images the client will buy. They don't know the difference - they just want the shot.
I don't wish to be offensive as everyone does as they pleases and thats fine - but for me, once a lens is in the bag and has proven its value - it stays in the bag and I wait until I can afford to buy the next one... which will stay in the bag. I have an aversion to throwing away money - you only get to have so much of it in life and it comes down to being a good steward of what resources we're allowed to handle.
I see no advantage or good sense in losing money by constantly shuffling my gear - no matter how much i value the immediate gratification it may give me. That is a lesson I learned a long time ago with guitars and music equipment. Do you realize I've had and sold a 66 Fender Twin? I bought it in Memphis for 250 bucks - its now worth 2500+! My old Marshall was ordered from Jim Marshall in the early seventies - it was the holy grail of amps - sold it for half what i paid for it... its untouchable now. Don't get me started on the pristine 56 Telecaster (now worth 60 to 100 thousand) or the Gibson EBO bass - or the Guild ES-125... this list can go on and on - all of it gone... cause i wanted to fund my next big purchase. I've been a fool. I've gained some wisdom. I'm willing to share it. If that is just opinionated BS to anyone else - thats your lesson to learn then. Fine by me - I ain't losing sleep or money on others spending habits. I'm really just trying to help with a little clarity. Unpopular as that may be.
In my case I bought cheap and made a little money on selling the items....so in may case I made out. I do know what you mean...
But I look at things differently...I hate to let things sit in my bag that are not used. They lose value when and if I decide I will never use it again. A newer version could come out etc.... I don't buy anything new so I don't have that money to lose by selling/trading. Some of use are not in a position to keep things around...
Good advice, JonB - I'll probably keep the 24-70 just because I don't want to lose $ on selling it - it's a great lens in it's own right - and I can build the price of renting a nice prime into my price until I can afford it.
Just dropped some cash on 1 AB800, a heavy duty stand, a boom attachment, and a medium softbox.
The wedding went really well this weekend, I think. Tracey and I had fun shooting it - the bride and groom (my cousins) were very easy to work with and the family was very gracious to us throughout the day. I'm sitting down Wednesday to do some editing and will share some shots then.
jbear2000 wrote:
A lot of people love those basses - but the vast majority of bass players didn't. You have to understand about bass players... while all drummers are crazy... all bass players aren't the brightest bulbs on the lot. .
With all due respect (and I'm sure you were only joking) I would pit my bass player against pretty much anyone in a match of IQs. He's one of the smartest guys I have evah known. And I'm pretty friggin' smart myself
Pictures! I've been trapped in my house with my kids because of all the damn rain. I've been shooting them and hanging curtains . Oh and processing old pics.
Jon Uhler wrote:
I have sold my 24-70 and don't miss it at all....
I have to ask....I understand loving the primes but what about those times when you just need a zoom, when things are moving and scenes changing and you don't control them? Do you still have a zoom for that sort of situation? When I shot at a wedding, I can't imagine not having a zoom to use. Things were changing so much at the reception, etc. I would have wasted a lot of time changing lenses and having to carry the bag around on my shoulder with the other lenses....or do you just get used to that and faster at it? The photog I worked with uses primes for the staged portraits and then her zoom at the reception. She's got one of those Shoot Sacs to carry around lenses. I have one of those as well and it's much nicer for moving around and keep a lower profile. My other camera bags stick way out from the side of my body, kwim? Anyway.....I think I just want it all. The primes and the nice zooms .
jbear2000 wrote:
I don't wish to be offensive as everyone does as they pleases and thats fine - but for me, once a lens is in the bag and has proven its value - it stays in the bag and I wait until I can afford to buy the next one... which will stay in the bag. I have an aversion to throwing away money - you only get to have so much of it in life and it comes down to being a good steward of what resources we're allowed to handle.
little clarity. Unpopular as that may be.
I think I am like you in this Jon B! While I want more lenses and such, I can't seem to part with the stuff I already have. I would rather wait to afford. I mean, I can't even bring myself to get rid of my old Canon Rebel, the 300D, the first version of the digital Rebel! I learned on that and spent a lot of time with it so I feel the need to keep it. I still have my film Canon Rebel too. I suppose I'm a bit of a collector. Now, if it came down to paying the mortgage, at least I know I have valuable camera equipment I could sell to people like Uhler who LOVE to change up their arsenal all the time!!!
smoov wrote:
With all due respect (and I'm sure you were only joking) I would pit my bass player against pretty much anyone in a match of IQs. He's one of the smartest guys I have evah known. And I'm pretty friggin' smart myself
That's why i quit playing bass and switched to lead... i couldn't keep up with their intellect... besides - i like girls too much...
Sounds like you got a keeper! ... for a lot of reasons.
smoov wrote:
I have to ask....I understand loving the primes but what about those times when you just need a zoom, when things are moving and scenes changing and you don't control them? Do you still have a zoom for that sort of situation? When I shot at a wedding, I can't imagine not having a zoom to use. Things were changing so much at the reception, etc. I would have wasted a lot of time changing lenses and having to carry the bag around on my shoulder with the other lenses....or do you just get used to that and faster at it? The photog I worked with uses primes for the staged portraits and then her zoom at the reception. She's got one of those Shoot Sacs to carry around lenses. I have one of those as well and it's much nicer for moving around and keep a lower profile. My other camera bags stick way out from the side of my body, kwim? Anyway.....I think I just want it all. The primes and the nice zooms . ...Show more →
When I shot the wedding I had two bodies so there was no lens swapping.
I totally understand how primes are for some people and no so much for others. I also understand that some people don't like to sell/trade....but that is also part of the hobby that I enjoy and I try and do it with out losing money. If I explained the deal that I made on the MKIII you would see what I mean....
smoov wrote:
I think I am like you in this Jon B! While I want more lenses and such, I can't seem to part with the stuff I already have. I would rather wait to afford. I mean, I can't even bring myself to get rid of my old Canon Rebel, the 300D, the first version of the digital Rebel! I learned on that and spent a lot of time with it so I feel the need to keep it. I still have my film Canon Rebel too. I suppose I'm a bit of a collector. Now, if it came down to paying the mortgage, at least I know I have valuable camera equipment I could sell to people like Uhler who LOVE to change up their arsenal all the time!!! ...Show more →
I do indeed....that has been a oart of just about every hobby that I have ever had...
smoov wrote:
I think I am like you in this Jon B! While I want more lenses and such, I can't seem to part with the stuff I already have. I would rather wait to afford. I mean, I can't even bring myself to get rid of my old Canon Rebel, the 300D, the first version of the digital Rebel! I learned on that and spent a lot of time with it so I feel the need to keep it. I still have my film Canon Rebel too. I suppose I'm a bit of a collector. Now, if it came down to paying the mortgage, at least I know I have valuable camera equipment I could sell to people like Uhler who LOVE to change up their arsenal all the time!!! ...Show more →
My thing is that bodies come and go and you lose enough money on them. Buy the best you can afford and nothing else. Lenses by and large don't start losing any value until the new replacement comes out or they switch mounts on the cameras. So lenses are a safe investment for the long haul. Everything one buys - loses money - unless it becomes a collector's item. And the only way to really profit from that is hold on to it for a really long time. That doesn't happen if you're constantly switching things around. Its all a balance. Everyone approaches things from different angles. I don't mind - i 'll pick up used secondary prime glass as they become available - but the money glass I buy new. You have to have a 24-70 in your bag for most events. That's all I'm saying. We are talking about "L" lenses here, prime or zoom - no one is suggesting buying anything less.
For artistic reasons - its a whole nother story... i just don't want to starve as an artist by losing my investment or having limitations on what i shoot for money.
Don't get me wrong people...the 24-70 is awesome...in a certain range. Everyone talks about the 2.8 side of it and it just isn't very good in that reguard. Once again..this is my opinion...from playing around and shooting a lot...
If I was making a ton of money from the 24-70 it would still be in my bag.
I love that part of this hobby...so many ways to skin the cat.
When I shot the wedding I had two bodies so there was no lens swapping.
I totally understand how primes are for some people and no so much for others. I also understand that some people don't like to sell/trade....but that is also part of the hobby that I enjoy and I try and do it with out losing money. If I explained the deal that I made on the MKIII you would see what I mean....
So you carried around two cameras on your person? What lenses did you find most useful at the wedding?
Don't get me wrong people...the 24-70 is awesome...in a certain range. Everyone talks about the 2.8 side of it and it just isn't very good in that reguard. Once again..this is my opinion...from playing around and shooting a lot...
If I was making a ton of money from the 24-70 it would still be in my bag.
I love that part of this hobby...so many ways to skin the cat.
Oh yes, I forgot you had that lens! That's the one I REALLY want next. I use my 24-105 for what I would call snapshots of my kids and such. You know, just catching them doing whatever they are doing without disturbing the scene or taking the time to go get a prime. Maybe when that new 5D comes out I'll get it and then I'll have 2 bodies laying around too! Alls you need now Uhler are some pocket wizards. I found them for a good price at Onecall.com. They are 188 each right now. What do they go for used?
smoov wrote:
So you carried around two cameras on your person? What lenses did you find most useful at the wedding?
Yes. I found that I shot with the 35L and 135L more than anything. The 24-70 did make an apperence for a couple shots. The 70-200 didn't leave the bag.
smoov wrote:
So you carried around two cameras on your person? What lenses did you find most useful at the wedding?
I always carry two bodies around on me at almost every gig I shoot - Normally the 24-70 and something else. This last time it was the 24 ƒ1.4. I've also carried the 135L, the 50/1.8 and the 70-200 primarily at sporting events. But two bodies are almost always on me if I'm shooting.
Does anyone who has two bodies prefer to just leave one in the bag? I like having the instant ability to switch bodies.
I usually just carry the second body as a backup. Though at the Falcon's games i had them both out. I've done some grip and grins and receptions that i had the second body in the hip bag - but it never left the bag. I quit doing that when I realized its awful heavy after a couple hours of shooting and the bodies are dependable enough to leave the other body elsewhere.
If all I had were primes - i'd use two bodies all the time and a 24 or 50 and an 85 would be an ideal duo. But since I have a good copy of a 24-70 and a great copy of a 70-200 - not much can escape their grasp and I have complete versatility. Both are plenty fast enough in the dark and the bokeh on either one isn't bad either. May not be in prime territory - but the customer doesn't know the difference anyway.
One thing to remember - the 24-70 is a badly maligned lens for good reason. Canon has a black eye over how many needed to be sent back to be calibrated. But once they are right - they are right! If they were that bad though - no one would buy them and they'd be replaced with another version. Since people still buy them - by the truck loads - it can be safely said that all those folks must think pretty highly of them. Its just a tool every photog needs to have. Sorta like a ratchet wrench... can't imaging a well stocked toolbox without one - but sometimes the nuts are so tight, a breakover wrench is the only tool that can do the job. Zooms and primes - all have their places.
I know my kit won't be complete until I have them all - then look out! For now the ƒ2.5 50 and the ƒ 2.8 100 are good enough for my uses - in fact the 100 is a fantastic hidden gem without the L price. I wish they'd upgrade it to an L and make it focus faster with a new USM - but i can work with it as is... I've had it sine 03 and its a workhorse.
My wish list includes a fisheye or 14mm, an 85mm, a 200mm, a 400, and a Super of some kind 5,6 or 800. (also want a couple TS lenses - but i'll see what and when on those as needed.) Until then, I can use my zooms and TC to get what I want out of my artistc bent and still make a few bucks here and there on the rest.
I didn't much care for the 24-105 when i first got it since its ƒ 4 and seemed too slow to shoot in the dark - but in broad daylight - it does OK.
The King and Queen shot was with it as well as this MARTA rail shot from the St Joe Hospital parking deck.
. Oh and processing old pics. 