New lens Adivce

[Aszental]

Hey.
I currently have a 17-70 sigma and a 50mm 1.8 canon lens and was looking for an upgrade.

Im overseas atm for the next few months but when i get back i want to start doing small event photography.

I was wondering if a 24-70 2.8L would be to tight on a 30d for indoor photography?

Would the 17-40 IS lens be better suited for the job?

Thanks

[moggy]

Don't know about Canon but if it was Nikon the equivilent 28-70 would be sweet.

[Oz_Beachside]

if your camera has a crop factor, like 1.4x, then the 17-40 sounds better. I dont know canon lenses, but a 17-55 at 2.8 type would be very nice.

also, IS means image stabalisation, which can give you much more use at low shutter speeds, and can be well worth the money in low light stills.

[drsnoopy2]

I think indoor photography demands a wider aperture at the 2.8 range, unless you incorporate the use of flash a lot as part of your shooting. I am in a similar situation, want a good lens to capture the kids indoors, and the Canon 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS doesn't cut the mustard. I am doing ok with the 50/1.8 at the moment, but the focussing is a bit slow & inaccurate at times, so I am saving up the pennies for a Canon 17-55 f/2.8.

Other lenses that i have considered include :
- Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
- Tamron 28-75 f/2.8
- Canon 24-70 f/2.8

The Canon is just too much for the budget, while the Tamrons are a lot more affordable. However, from what I've been told, you really need to try the Tamron lenses out yourself, because there are some out there that are not as well calibrated. If you find a good sharp copy though, it's gold. Plus if you upgrade to a full-frame camera in future, you can still use them, unlike the EF-S 17-55. I am going for the Canon because it has IS, am not in a position to be able to try out the Tamrons, and I am not expecting to upgrade to a FF camera (even if you do, the resale value on it should be good).

Good luck with your decision.

[moz]

I was wondering if a 24-70 2.8L would be to tight on a 30d for indoor photography? Would the 17-40 IS lens be better suited for the job?

I have the 24-70 and 16-35 lenses, and I'd be more inclined to use the wide lens for group shots. For portraits the 24-70 would be better but you are definitely trading off the ability to get a whole room or group in the shot. Unless you're planning to leap to full frame soon I'd look very carefully at the 17-55/2.8 IS, because it's a really nice lens with quite useful focal lengths. Pretty much exactly what you're after. I have the Sigma 18-50/2.8 and it's great. Well, technically my girlfriend has it, but you know...

I'd suggest looking at off-camera flash, either a cord or eBay wireless setup. If you don't have a 550/580/580II already maybe look at getting one while you're away.

If you can't/don't want to use flash something faster might be useful, but I'd be cautious - the extra stop costs big bucks and requires primes, so buying a second body becomes likely and it just gets worse from there. Again, the Sigma 30/1.4 is nice, but the 28/1.4 or 35/1.4 are full frame equivs with price tags to match. For the money you might find that a second hand 1DIIn does a better job in low light.

It all depends how much money you want to spend... the single lens solution here is IMO the 17-55.

[Aszental]

mmm the 17-55mm f2.8 IS looks great.

So would a 17-55mm f2.8 IS, a 70-200 (i can have this on another body)

A 580 EXII and another off camera flash pretty much cover me for all situations?

Thanks for the help so far guys

[moz]

So would a 17-55mm f2.8 IS, a 70-200 (i can have this on another body) A 580 EXII and another off camera flash pretty much cover me for all situations?

The 70-200 would really be pushing it indoors, you'd be better off with a prime of some sort, probably a wide one unless you buy a FF or 1.3 crop body. For general use a cheap second body (I use my gf's 350D) is quite useful and a 70-200 on that would give you good reach outdoors. In some ways the ideal combo is the 24-105 on a FF with 70-200 on a crop body, and if you can find one the 1Ds would be great. But for indoor work with a non-1D body you want wider aperture than the 24-105/4.

For indoor work I quite often use the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 on one body (switching as necessary) and the 18-50 or 24-70 on the other. The 30D is much better at focussing in low light than the 350D, and the 1 series bodies are another step up from there.