What lense(s) would you rent?

[BTLowry]

OK planning on making a trip to Red River New Mexico

Here is my current arsenal

Canon Rebel T2i

Lenses

• 28 -135 IS USM 3.5-5.6
• 75-300 USM 4-5.6
• 18-55 3.5-5.6 "kit lens"
• 28-80 3.5 -5.6 "kit lens

"

What would you take if you had the above but wanted to rent some lenses to play with?

I am thinking a 70-200 L f/2.8 IS or maybe 70-300 to get more distance or ??

I am sure the GS has some suggestions so let me have them

[Robby Brown]

85mm 1.2 L series
100mm 2.8 macro L series
Or go big with a 400mm 2.8

Those are my "one day" lenses

[TUCO]

I am thinking a 70-200 L f/2.8 IS

It is Canon's Flagship lens for a reason...

[Cottonwood]

It is Canon's Flagship lens for a reason...

X10

[BTLowry]

OK the 70-200 L f/2.8 IS is on the list

I will check into the ones you suggested RB

Also since I am very much a "beginner" at this stage, post up what you would suggest using the lens you recommend for
ie I have no idea what I would use a 85mm f/1.2 for? Scenery? close up pics of flowers/chipmunks/etc?

[AtTheWall]

If it were me....I would rent an 11 thousand dollar lens of this variety

Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM Telephoto Lens. It's a fixed length telephoto with Image Stabilization which means, you will be able to shoot shots out around 100 yards filling the lens with the subject and potentially shoot all of them hand held. It's not gonna give you panoramic shots but it will deliver very detailed shots of subjects at decent range.


Here's a shot example



Rent something you can never afford and use the snot out of it before return!

[AtTheWall]

85mm f/1.2

Extremely low light shots from macro ranges (probably have to hold out around 3ft to focus on a butterfly for exampl) all the way out to what ever range you want to shoot....most particularly at it's wide open value of f/1.2. The BOKEH effect of this lens in the daytime....lets just say if you want to dial in someone's nose and have their eyes out of focus in a fade....this lens will probably get there at f/1.2. Shots made with this lens will be super creamy....allowing your subject matter to jump out in super sharp focus.

Note the leopard shot above.....the background is creamy....an f/1.2 will be very creamy = BOKEH

[Robby Brown]

BT there is a website called pixel peeper. You can select a lens and see examples of the images others have taken.

[BTLowry]

Thanks for all of the advice

RB thanks for that link

ATW I like the way you think

[d_e_smith]

I'd want to try out that new 200-400mm f/4L IS USM

[BTLowry]

I'd want to try out that new 200-400mm f/4L IS USM

The newest 200-400 is $785 for 10 days

Think I would just buy a 70-200 L f/2.8 and have something in the bag

[AtTheWall]

Think I would just buy a 70-200 L f/2.8 and have something in the bag

Agree! You will find it very very useful and shots of family...years down the road will justify the purchase.

i used a fix 300mm F/4 L Canon lens for range. It's my cheapest alternative for long rane day shots factoring in....the 2.8 model hits 4 -5 k. Add 400mm....even at F/4, it's priceyin.....$6500.00!!!! So my only option was 300mm f/4 and then add a 1.4x Teleconverter to kick it out further....which i rarely ever do because I lose a lot of speed immediately taking the f/4 out to f/8 or more....meaning I then have no speed and shots need a lot of bright sunlight to snap anything at that point. It would be better to shoot at 300mm and then crop, using the better quality image than the other alternative, trying to push 300mm with tele to more..and suddenly a cloud floats over and blows it all and the shot is now barely decent quality.

I also have a Canon 24mm - 70mm F/2.8 L lens. It's an excellent quality mid-range lens, very sharp and fits that walk around roll I purchased it for. it will cover shots at range decently enough that if a wildlife shot oppportunity at range presented itself, I can potentially crop the shot to better capture and frame the subject without too much quality loss.

Remember...if you go from 10 - 300 on a single lense, the internal glass required to make that focal transition will distort shots more than any lens of fixed length and or a multi-range lens of lesser focal adjustment. 10 - 300 mm versus a 10 - 50mm then a 70 - 150 mm, then 150 - 300 mm. Yes you do need more lenses to cover the gaps but, the quality of the shots will be very noticeable if all are worthy of the L rating (Canon for example).

Long range lenses of the fixed 200 or 300 mm range, they are very good macro lenses for shots made on critters that flight before you can get the lens inches away for the shot.

Here's a 300mm f/4 L macro shot - made at roughly 4ft away. Had I used a traditional macro lens of lesser magnification, this scene would never have materialized. Also note the BOKEH effect of the background....a yellow line cutting across the background colors. It really adds a little more to this scene and it's not so overpowering, you lose focus on the main subject due to background clutter.

[BTLowry]

Is that a bumble bee?

Or some form of robber fly disguised as a bumble bee?

Thanks for the advice and explanations too

[Casey]

I might suggest you try out something for landscapes. While I agree the 70-200f2.8L is awesome, I would get more use out of something like the 17-55 f2.8 IS. I love this lens. I think you'd use it more than the 70-200. With that being said, get both if your budget allows.

[Hillary]

I agree with Casey.
Get a lens for length, then a lens for landscape. A Wide lens will make you happy.