What to buy?

[walmerironman]

Hello Everyone!

I am new here so "Hello".

I have had a 400D for a year now having moved back into taking pics after a few years away. I am getting some good pics of mainly my kids but i have to admit I do not appear to have much of a creative bone in me...sadly.

Anyway I want to try and concentrate on either portraits or (complete opposite) pics of freestyle, mtb jumping at a couple of local outdoor venues.

The question I have what should I invest in, if at all, to get the best results?

Current bag holds 400D, std 18-55, Tamron 70-300 1:4-5.6 and an old cobra flash.

I would really like a nice wide angle for the bikes but they all seem very expensive, or maybe an off the camera flash set up. But for portraits is there a recommended lense that is better then the std 18-55, also what about a small studio flash set?

I've a budget of £400, so not the most.

thanks for reading, lots of questions I know.

Thanks

Bryan

[Gidders]

Hi Bryan

The classic focal length for a portrait lens is ~80mm which is the equivalent to ~50mm on a crop frame sensor such as the 400D - a point in the range that your 18-55 covers.

I'm not sure if your 18-55 is one of the earlier ones or the mk II IS lens. The performance of the latter is significantly improved over the non IS lens. Either way the Canon 50mm f1.8 is something of a bargin at ~£90 and delivered fantastic performance once stopped down to f4 or so http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...uct/150/cat/10

For a wide angle the Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 EX DC gets great reviews from everyone who uses it.

Interfit do a twin head studio flash kit EX150 Mark II for ~£240 - I've not used it but I suspect that one might quickly outgrow it. I'm looking at the Bowens Gemini 200/200 2 Head Studio Kit at the moment £509 at Warehouseexpress - £440 in Jessops its in a different league build quality wise

[postcardcv]

I agree with Clive about the 50 f1.8 it's an amazing lens for the money and if good for portraits, Amazon seems to have the best price at the moment - http://www.camerapricebuster.com/Can...1.8_II_pc.html The Sigma 10-20 is very wide, personally I found it was too much in some situations so the use was quite limited. If possible then try one out, that way you'll be able to get a feel for it and an idea of whether it would be of use to you.

I was looking at studio flash heads last year and did look at the Interfit kit but it looked a bit flimsy and got some dodgy reviews, so I went for an Elinchrom D-Lite kit instead. I've been really pleased with them, they're easy to use and work just as they should. The only problem I've had is all the extra stuff you start 'needing', I've added some backgrounds, a light meter and IR trigger and recently I've bought an extra head to light the background... it can really suck money from you! If you are serious about flash then be warned than some of the prices are on the way up, Elinchrom gear is going up 30% so it's worth looking for someone with stock at the old price.

[walmerironman]

thanks guys for the advice. Something to think about. I have seen the 50m and considered it. What would be good for off the camera flash for the mtb pics?

[yelvertoft]

A lot depends on what your style is for the mtb pictures, but I'd say that the 18-55 you have is a suitable sort of focal length for bike racing, I've done a bit of cyclocross photography and found it to be a suitable zoom range for this kind of shot. The standard kit lens isn't the fastest, so something with a bigger aperture may be the answer. A lot depends on the lighting conditions you're shooting in. Wouldn't recommend the Sigma 10-20 for mtb work, it does make things seem very, very distant in the frame. By the time you have a frame filling shot of a mtb at 10mm, he's hit you!

If you get a decent flash, then it could be used on camera for a bit of fill-in with the mtb shots, and also used off camera with a brolly for portrait work. It all depends how seriously you want to take it. I use a Metz 58AF-1 wirelessly off camera and can highly recommend it for small scale lighting with a brolly that would work well for head/shoulders. If you want full length portraits, I think you'll have to get a studio kit.

Before you buy anything, I really strongly suggest you think about where you want to go with your photography. It does seem you haven't really decided what sort of work you want to do.

Duncan

[sassan]

Portrait has a lot to do with light and technique than tools alone.

The difference between a cheap entry level DSLR sensor and top of the notch, super doper mega $ sensor is much less obvious than the level of improvement, expensive glass provides you.

In other words your quality of picture will show a significant difference when you upgrade to those high price lenses. But then you got many good advises here including the last one from Duncan that you really don't need the most expensive ones or for that mater anything beyond the kit lens, until the right time.
When do you know if time is right?
Your eyes will tell you.
Till that time, get to know your gears head to toe and try to bring out all the juice out with what you have now, then as time comes you know how to get the most with least spent.

At the end to address your question with the budget you mentioned, my first suggestion for upgrade would be "Tamron SP AF28-75mm F/2.8 XR". Well you don't get the wide end side but then you get a very useful overall lens with sharpness and excellent color render of this one that is only equal to some much much more expensive lenses. After all you simply can't get all in one swiss army knife type answer.