Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Help with a decision
Page <<first <prev 6 of 6
Jun 26, 2018 10:19:51   #
clickety
 
[quote=anotherview]Ken Rockwell offers a write-up of the Canon EFs 17-85mm IS.

He says this about the lens: "This is Canon's best basic midrange digital zoom."

(found at: https://kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/17-85-is.htm)

These words: "This is Canon's best basic midrange digital zoom." were written in 2006. There have been many new lenses and improvements since then, (the 18-135 for one). I'm sure it's still as good as it ever was BUT is it still the "best"??

Reply
Jun 26, 2018 12:05:13   #
lwhitehall Loc: St. Louis
 
Unless your bride shoot too, one camera - two lenses (16-300 and a fisheye). I very much doubt that you will have any time to use the fisheye. I overseas travel with a 7D and a Tamron 18-270 and have never been disappointed by that. The only use I have with the fisheye is to catch everyone of my family at a dinner table or big headed pets of the family.

Secondly - Congrats

Reply
Jun 26, 2018 20:17:50   #
Angel Star Photography Loc: Tacoma, WA
 
Vector wrote:
Hi all,

I am getting married this summer and we will be doing an Alaskan cruise for the honeymoon. I expect there will be many photographic opportunities and want to be prepared but not (overly) weighed down. I shoot with a Canon 7DII and the following long lenses: A fish eye (I forget what brand), Tamron 16- 300, Sigma 120- 400, and the following Canon lenses: 10- 20, 17-55 f2.8, 15-85, 24-70 f2.8, 70- 200 f2.8, and 70- 300. I have some primes (30, 50, 85mm).

I was contemplating getting the Tamron 18-400 (and selling the 16-300) but wasn't able to get a definitive answer as to if the change was really worth it. Thoughts? Any and all feedback (besides taking them all- grin) is appreciated.
Hi all, br br I am getting married this summer an... (show quote)


Honestly, I believe you have quite an adequate supply of lens with a variety of reaches and the 18-400 only exceeds the maximum reach in your current arsenal by 100mm. I recommend that you save your money, save your time, and enjoy more of the moments of your new marriage which no amount of photography can capture. Take a note from Joel Sartore who has stated that sometimes you should just put the camera down and enjoy the moment. While it is so very tempting because of the trip, try your best to not turn your honeymoon into a photo shoot excursion. Just my opinion...

Reply
 
 
Jun 28, 2018 22:18:10   #
pilot64 Loc: Atlanta, GA
 
Tamron 16-300 or 18-400 will work great the the 7DII. For lower light, the canon 70-200 will be OK as well. A 1.4 teleconverter for the Tamron can be a big help. Even on a cruise, wildlife pops up when you lease expect it. Take movies too!

Buy your bride a good starter camera if she is not a shooter. The Canon Rebel T-6 is a great starter camera and you can share lenses! And don't forget, this is your honeymoon....

Reply
Jun 29, 2018 08:47:43   #
insman1132 Loc: Southwest Florida
 
I would not buy anything new. Take your Tamron 16-300 and your Canon 10-20 and don't look back!! When you get back you will be happy you had at least the 300 reach with you. Have don't your cruise trip many times.

Have a GREAT Honeymoon and a wonderful Life together. What a great way to start your marriage.

Reply
Jun 29, 2018 21:51:06   #
JD750 Loc: SoCal
 
Dossile wrote:
I’d take the 17-55 and the 70-200 and spend most of my time with my camera in it’s bag and my new wife on my arm. The 70-200 is a nice lens to record memories of your Alaska cruise together. In two or three decades those pictures together will become much more significant than any photos of scenery or wildlife.



Reply
Page <<first <prev 6 of 6
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.