Lighting vs New Lens???????

[dmann]

So, I'm hoping all you marvelous people at DPS can help me with a decision.

I enjoy portrait photography, and I have a 50mm 1.8 lens which I love for close ups but would like something I could possibly expand the range of portrait shots I can get. Something I can do some landscape and action/sports photography with, on the odd occasion. My knowledge is fairly limited at this point because I am just getting into photography and I dont want to be naive and buy a $900 lens (looking at the 70-200mm telephoto) to get the shots I want if its just my lack of knowledge thats preventing me from getting them with what I already have.

I was wondering if I would benefit more from a external light and a reflector or some other lighting gadgets (I have yet to do my research on what exactly).

I know alot of this will come down to personal choice but I was hoping some of you could share your knowledge and personal experiences to help me make my decision.

Thanks a ton!

[corry]

i would suggest a reflector for portraits, can make a big difference in lighting the face and you don't need to spend $100 you can practice with a sheet of foam core to start. I'm just learning with mine but wishing I had bought it earlier.

[nickbedford]

You can do a lot with a single speedlite (one that is capable of being triggered at least optically) and a 5-in-1 reflector/diffuser.

You can use the popup flash on your camera at very low power to trigger an off camera flash (such as a Canon 430EX II or equivalent Nikon) and use the diffuser as a bit of a softbox. If you like portraits, starting to learn some basic lighting will really start to expand what you can achieve. Available light is fantastic, but is not always as sculptable as available light and a flash (or two or 3 ...).

[Sweetlifephoto]

I agree with the previous posters controlling the light with reflectors (that can also block light when you need it) and flashes will bring your work to a whole new level.

Having said that longer lenses are more flattering for portrait shooting. 85mm and higher are our primary lenses when shooting individuals and couples. If you are primarily going to be shooting portraits, especially if they are for traditional photo shoots, then a longer lens should be in your plans for the near future.

[Rentham]

Dollar for dollar, I find lighting to be an overall better value.

[Tzetsin]

The 70-200 lens is more for portraits anyway. its too short for wildlife, and too long for stunning vistas. it actually doesnt make that great of a landscape lens at all. Lighting as the others have also said will bring a whole new depth for your photography far far in the future. Any lens you get after getting an off camera speedlight will have its usefullness at least doubled with the use of natural light or speedlight. That said, the "technical" difficulty of using the speedlight will force you to learn more (alot more) about photography. So if your ok with having to learn more, and you want to really have a lot of control over your photographs then you MUST get an OFF CAMERA flash. (just a flash on your camera isnt enough, you must get off camera functionality however you can. Cactus radio triggers are 100 a set and work awsomely)

[MindyRaeL]

I have to agree with most others here - lighting is the way to go. And you don't have to spend a fortune if you're just getting into lighting. There are a lot of third party hot shoe flashes that work too, and are a lot cheaper. But getting it off camera is important. I know already Tzetsin mentioned the cactus triggers, but if you're on a really tight budget, try the Yongnuo Transceivers. . I used them when I first started, and they work just fine. Not professional level, but you can't beat the price.

[dmann]

Thanks everyone for your time and advice. I will go with lighting for now with a new lens in the budget for later on