Quote:
Originally Posted by tprickett
1.I want a lens that’s good to go on a walk with (walk around lens) I want to be able to shoot Portrait, Outdoor, event etc more general shooting
|
1. 24-70/2.8
2. 70-200/2.8
3. 50/1.2
Quote:
|
2.What lens provides the best quality/speed (minus the prime lens) (sharpness)
|
1. 24-70/2.8
1. 70-200/2.8
Quote:
|
3.What is the best value & why?
|
1. 70-200/2.8 - 'cause I like it and it has more focal range
2. 50/1.2 - mucho sharp and razor thin DoF with great bokeh
3. 24-70/2.8
Quote:
|
4.What lens offers more bang for the buck without sacrificing quality
|
1. 70-200/2.8 - most focal range for the buck
2. 24-70/2.8
3. 50/1.2
Some thoughts:
- All of this is so relative and subjective, it's not even funny. Put 10 photographers in room with these choices and you'll get 20 different arguments. Don't laugh. I said it wasn't funny.
- Watch the weight on these. "Walkaround" lens for me isn't based on weight but some people REALLY factor carryability into the equation. I'll lug a Remington 700 with a match barrel and big 'ole scope all day long for a single shot, though, so I'm not particularly weight conscious.
- If lowlight shooting is important to you, the 24-70 has IS while the 70-200 that you chose does not. The 50 can shoot so wide open, I can't say IS is really even required.
- Eventually, you'll get them all so just pick the one you want FIRST. You know you're buying the others later.
- Manufacturer specific questions like this are better placed in the topic specific forums, like the Canon forum for this one.