File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Oh hi /p/

Consider the following scenario: I suddenly have 600 spare bucks for me to spend however I wish. Please suggest me something to take a look at that I could purchase with this money, considering the following:

My current gear:
Canon XTi
EF-S 18-55 (kit)
Tamron 28-75 F2.8
EF 50mm F1.8

and things I've been looking staring at:

Rebel K2 film body
Canon 35mm F2
Sigma 12-24 F4-5
Comment too long. Clickhereto view the full text.
>> Anonymous
My kneejerk instinct is the 35/2 (or the 28/1.8 or some other normal prime) because everyone in theory ought to have a fast normal prime, but more reasonably: What do you shoot? What sort of photographs do you aim for? What are your working methods?
>> Anonymous
17-40 f4L
>> Anonymous
>>161231
Considering I'm a student, though not particularly a photography student, we could say most of my work consists of
a) portraiture (which is what both the 50mm and 28-75 are good for)
b) product photography (again the 28-75 comes into play)
c) photojournalistic work (28-75 fits the bill very often)

The rest of the time, when I'm not on a 'job' so to say, I just pack around the 50mm with me, so the camera doesnt get in the way, but is always there when I need it, without becoming a burden. I often do find it to be a little bit closed however, so the 28 1.8 does seem like a sound option, as I really like (night photography as well).
I do often, however, feel lacking on the tele department.

Also, I'd like to experiment, given the time, with wider angle photography. I may have found Im actually interested in industrial or architectural photography, and I'm not lazy to lug a tripod around.

Pretty much, a fucking wildcard. I feel lacking on both tele and wide, and my standard isn't completely satisfactory (part of the reason I considered a film body, to make my standard lenses act like what they were designed to be)
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>161232
I agree with anon,
Get the 17-40mm , you already have the 28-75 and you probably will want something that will be leagues better than the 18-55, that being said, the 17-40mmL could be picked up for less than 600 used.
>> Anonymous
>>161247
My single recommendation for potraiture is getting a 85mm f/1.8. I don't know how useful it is on a digital body though. But it does have delicious bokeh which I whole heartedly look for.
>> Anonymous
>>161247
Go for the 28/1.8, then. And, if you have any money left over, a film Rebel, used will probably be some piddling sum, and this:

http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/mir_20m_lens_for_canon_eos.htm

Cheap Russian ultrawide. That should do you pretty cheaply for the wide end.
>> Anonymous
17-40 is pretty damn slow

with the 85 1.8, you have enough cash left for a sub-30mm prime
>> Anonymous
OP here

I'd be okay with an F4+ wide/ultrawide zoom but I think I'd like it to be far wider than the 17-40. This one seems like a badass non EF-S version of the kit lens though honestly, it's the one I use the least.... maybe I should take it for a spin more often?

Concerning the 85 1.8, I've read about it before, and I lusted over its sharpness and bokeh for quite a while but I think I'd feel a little crippled being stuck to such a long focal. I think my 28-75 does pretty well in the portrait department though (not that it beats the 85mm 1.8 or anything eh)

I kinda like that idea though, getting a 28 F1.8 and the film body, or an 85 with a 28 F2.8. Those are some nice things to think about.

/p/hags deliver once more; thanks for your advice!
>> Anonymous
>>161277This one seems like a badass non EF-S version of the kit lens though honestly

No, it seems like a somewhat badass ultra wide angle lens for film cameras/5D/1Ds.
>> I||ICIT !!mknjFN/v/49
>>161277
if your still reading;
how about getting the sigma 12-24, selling the kit, either way you should sell it no matter what you buy, then use that money towards a 55-250IS?

thatll leave you with 12-24, 28-75, 55-250 and 50mm.

also you should try get the 28 as well considering its fairly fast and will fit you film as well...
>> Anonymous
>>161284
Good point, I missed that

>>161289
Still reading (and taking suggestions too)

I was considering keeping the 18-55 actually, until I get to sell this body (easier to sell it that way) for when I upgrade to something or other.

I'll look into that 55-250 IS model, which I wasnt aware of. Is it the kit lens' tele companion by chance or am I way off?
>> I||ICIT !!mknjFN/v/49
>>161300
fuck it, sell that bitch!

i traded in my 300d w.out kit lens easy as :)
only the people using a dslr as a p/s will pay less because it doesnt come with a kit lens, that, or they can buy one anywhere for fuck all(50nzd over here, dunno usd... still cheap i bet!)
>> Anonymous
I might try it, but I think I'd have a hard time, at least, selling the body without a lens at my school; would probably have to advertise elsewhere.

That's part of the reason I would keep it though, it's easier to sell it to point and shoot noobs with the kit lens.