sjaszczak
A Real Gentleman
Reged: 08/06/2005
Posts: 1155
Loc: York
|
|
Seeing as how this can be a pretty big expensive hobby...especially so for those with "L addiction" or "F2.8 fever" and a host of other glass-related ailments...
I thought it would be interesting to see what everyone is saving for as their next purchase (assuming it's actually a lens of course).
Different from the "fantasy optics" thread obviously...this is all about the current object of your optical desire.
Personally, I haven't really thought that much about it myself...but it will probably be the Canon 100mm macro.
--------------------
Steve
My Flickr
|
Overread
old hand
Reged: 17/01/2008
Posts: 1002
Loc: UK; Suffolk
|
|
Well my next purchase is a big one!
Been saving for a while and still saving for the following:
Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS
Sigma 150mm macro
canon 1.4 teleconverter
canon 2* teleconverter
sigma 1.4 teleconverter
hoping that with all that in one go that a local store might be willing to do a deal to get the sale - if not then its off to online world!
And that should break my bank for a good long while!
--------------------
My photography blog
http://overread.wordpress.com
|
Malcolm_Stewart
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 11/07/2005
Posts: 2727
Loc: Milton Keynes, UK
|
|
I can thoroughly recommend the EF 100 f2.8 USM macro, which I tend to keep for just macro work. I also have the EF 50 f2.5 compact macro (and its dedicated life-size adapter) and I found the lens by itself to be a fantastic travel lens on my 5D. It's superb for shots of wild Alpine flowers (1:1 is rarely needed in the field, I've found) and it's excellent for architecture where its drawing doesn't distort the architecture, as a zoom might tend to do.
What's my next likely buy? Hmm - how about the EF 500 f4L IS? It's probably too heavy to get that much use, and very expensive, but I do quite a bit of bird photography and the specialist forums do tend to promote it!
--------------------
Malcolm Stewart
|
daft_biker
Action Man!
Reged: 11/10/2006
Posts: 7966
Loc: Doon the glen
|
|
Nothing really but kinda tempted by a 300mm f/4 to try out some wildlife shots. Busy shooting other stuff so quite happy with what I've got just now 
New bouncy bike on the other hand...500mm f/4 money but at least I'll use it regularly.
--------------------
Andrew (BSRIPN) ... Pics.
|
bench_ubbster
Bench Meister
Reged: 08/08/2006
Posts: 2700
Loc: Cambridgeshire, UK
|
|
Having hired the 400mm L f/5.6 for a week, I will not be buying one. No doubt about it, it is a superb optic, but I just could not justify spending that amount for a lens I would probably use a hand full of times a year. Also, during that week, I found it took a lot of getting used to and a week wasn't enough.
So, like you, my next purchase will be the 100mm macro. Do you think there is an IS version of this lens in the wings? Afterall, Nikon do have a VR version of their 105mm micro lens and I've seen great things from this lens.
--------------------
Master of the Bench and Global Ambassador of the Brotherhood of the Bench
Bench or No Bench
|
OneTen
'Two Breakfasts'
Reged: 23/06/2003
Posts: 2661
Loc: Devon
|
|
I've been thinking about the EF400mm f5.6L and was saving for one, but I realised that a second body would be more use at this stage and I'm doing OK with a 200mm and 2x converter. I really don't want to build a vast kit with loads of lenses. I like the setup I have at the moment and will have to consider the merits of the 400mm verses the extra bulk and weight.
--------------------
Richard .......... My Website - My Flickr
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 38306
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
I find myself in that oddest of positions for an inveterate equipment buyer - I don't actually want any lenses at the moment. I've got enough. MORE than enough. And they cover everything I think I need even in my wildest flights of fancy. Oh, I would quite like some TS-Es, and a 180mm macro, and I have toyed with the idea of the 70-200 f4 IS or possibly even the 100-400, but none of them have been anything other than idle speculation. I'm very happy with the lenses I've got. And the camera(s), for that matter! Now there really IS a first. 
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
daft_biker
Action Man!
Reged: 11/10/2006
Posts: 7966
Loc: Doon the glen
|
|
Oh aye...TS-E 24mm....mmmmmm  I'd need a FF body for it to be worthwhile but wouldn't mind FF and the 180mm macro as a 2nd camera on a tripod anyway.
Need to get my 100mm macro back and see how far away infinity focus is with tubes on...suspect far enough away to still be able to fit in bigger beasties but use the tubes to increase focal length/reduce angle of view instead of reduce minimum focus. That and with the way the Canon 100mm macro reduces in focal length as you focus closer (70mm f/2 at 1:1?) it should mean with tubes on I can have the focus set further away so get a narrower AoV from that too. Worth a go so I don't need to carry more kit I reckon.
--------------------
Andrew (BSRIPN) ... Pics.
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 38306
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
It's a shade more than 70mm, I think - I've done experiments with the 50mm and LSC compared to the 100mm both at 1:1, and the working distance of the 100mm is a touch longer.
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
LargeFormat
veteran
Reged: 24/10/2006
Posts: 1213
Loc: Buckinghamshire and Cumbria
|
|
Really depends on how good (and reasonably priced) the Sony (a500) full frame is. If it's OK my first lens will be the CZ 24-70 f2.8 followed by the G 70-200 f2.8 for my next Africa trip at Christmas.
|
alanS
Dr Dust
Reged: 30/09/2005
Posts: 3724
Loc: Up North, England.
|
|
"Sigma 150mm macro" I have one 
--------------------
Alan's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."
|
weasley
addict
Reged: 11/01/2006
Posts: 507
|
|
AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4
Not a huge amount to save, but that is my next target.
|
Fen
BAD WOLF
Reged: 12/03/2002
Posts: 21356
Loc: London'ish
|
|
Quote:
AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4
Not a huge amount to save, but that is my next target.
That's on my list as well.
--------------------
Fen .......... My Galleries - My Blog - My Flickr
|
huwevans
Old Hand
Reged: 05/08/2000
Posts: 15552
Loc: Dorset, UK
|
|
Like Nick I'm in the happy position of having all the lenses I want at the moment. I am contemplating a pair of compact binoculars though - haven't decided which yet.
--------------------
Huw Evans.
   
|
Gordon_McGeachie
Joke Historian
Reged: 19/01/2007
Posts: 4248
Loc: East Yorkshire,
|
|
I would love some Minolta/Sony G glass
Especially the 300 f2.8, I am following a 200 f2.8 on ebay at the mo.
A 70-200 2.8 is not out of the question.
I would like either of these for bird on the wing pictures
--------------------
She (Avro Vulcan XH558) Took To The Sky Like A Lovesick Angel.
|
alanS
Dr Dust
Reged: 30/09/2005
Posts: 3724
Loc: Up North, England.
|
|
Ooohhh. Binoculars. I've been looking since they were mentioned here some weeks ago but I can't let go of my "Boots Admiral" binocuilars I've had since I was maybe 10. As I'm 21 now I'm attached to them (don't believe everything you read...)
I'm happy with my lenses but if I go full frame -
A 50mm f1.4, to replace my Sigma 30mm f1.4 and complinent my 50mm f2.5.
A standard f2.8 zoom.
Maybe a 90 0r 100mm.
Maybe a 28 or 35mm to fill the gap between my 20mm and 50mm primes.
--------------------
Alan's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."
|
daft_biker
Action Man!
Reged: 11/10/2006
Posts: 7966
Loc: Doon the glen
|
|
Quote:
It's a shade more than 70mm, I think - I've done experiments with the 50mm and LSC compared to the 100mm both at 1:1, and the working distance of the 100mm is a touch longer.
I can't remember if the manual for the 100mm has the info on what exposure adjustments need to be made for DoF calculations (the 180mm does I'm sure)...2/3rds of a stop or something like that for the 100mm but I think it may have been more for the 180mm. I can't really remember the figures for them! Can you calculate the focal length and max aperture at various focus distances from that?
If so does that mean the MP-E 65mm is effectively 130mm at 1:1?....it's 65mm f/2.8 if it was focused on infinity (apparently!) but the max aperture at 1:1 is f/5.6 (f/16.8 at 5:1). The 100mm has about twice the working distance of the MP-E but feels wider 
--------------------
Andrew (BSRIPN) ... Pics.
Edited by daft_biker (05/06/2008 15:10)
|
NorthernNikon
Bulls Hitter
Reged: 16/12/2005
Posts: 6374
Loc: Harrogate, North Yorks
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4
Not a huge amount to save, but that is my next target.
That's on my list as well.
I've got that one ... it's lurvely. 
Next on my list is the Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8, but that may be sometime away given the targets I've been landed with this year, bonuses could be thin on the ground until H2  
--------------------
www.BarneyAllen.com the new home of ComicShots.
|
IvorETower
Little Buttercup
Reged: 15/11/2006
Posts: 1789
Loc: Camberley, Surrey
|
|
In my mind, I'm saving for a Sigma 70-200 mkII f2.8 and a Nikon D300.
However in practice I doubt that I will be buying either for a long, long time
--------------------
Too many cameras, too many lenses.......
|
Scphoto
Little Fruitbat
Reged: 13/11/2005
Posts: 2648
Loc: Birmingham, UK
|
|
Not too sure, but I might like to try a 24mm TSE or a 500mm.
Really depends how much cash I get in the next few months. So most likely it'll 0mm lens then!
--------------------
Happiness is a Kebab call donor - Pictures/Blog
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
