Equipment input needed... Versatility in low light

[Quintin]

Hi there, everyone. This is my first post here, and I've come with something rather specific in mind. Hope you can help me out a bit.

Basically, I bought a Canon 500D earlier on in the year, and I've been using it for work and pleasure (I'm a graphic and multimedia designer, and pretend to be a visual artist in my scarce spare time ). I'm by no means an experienced photographer, but I'm learning fast and I'd like to make professional photography a part of my skill set one day.

So far, the only upgrades I've made to my camera package are a 58mm circular polarising filter and a rather crummy rubber lens hood. I have the Canon 18-55mm IS kit lens that came with the camera - decent, but limiting, especially in low light and at long distances (band photography is another hobby).

Recently, I've come up with a fun, not-for-profit project that will look great on my portfolio, but it's got some rather demanding equipment requirements. The premise: A graphic novel, staged and shot with my 500D and enhanced later in Photoshop.

I'll be shooting people and scenes in a very close, dark and dusty environment. As such, I'll probably need a very fast general purpose lens, since it'd be too dusty to change lenses while on site. I've also considered using an external flash.

Here are some of the items I've looked at for this project. Since I'll be buying, I'd like them to work for me in the long term as well.

• Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM
  
• Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM
  
• Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM
  
• Canon Speedlite 580EX II Flash Review

I know, pricey, and I'll have to put my nose to the grindstone for a month or so more to afford the more expensive lenses.

I know, in theory, what these lenses would empower me to do, but I'd appreciate any insights you might be able to share with me - like I've said, I'm still quite green where photography and gear are concerned. It'd be especially cool to hear impression of this gear from those of you who have actually used them.

It'd be even cooler to hear some suggestions from the DIY photography side.

Thanks.

[OsmosisStudios]

Instantly, low-light means the 24-105 f/4 is out.

Are you looking for a system, or a single lens? The 24-70 f/2.8 is a good general lens, but it may not be long enough for band photography (depending on the venue). Flash isnt great for that either, but you can use it in a slow-sync role. The 70-200 may be your best bet, but it may prove too LONG in certain situations.

Ultimately, get both f/2.8 zooms and the flash. If you can only choose one, I'd say one of the lenses, depending on what focal lengths you need.

[inkista]

EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, EF 85mm f/1.8 USM, or EF 100mm f/2 USM for the band photography, depending on how far away you are (if you're really far away, the 135L might be worth looking at). You can go considerably faster with available light with a prime lens rather than a zoom. And the 50/1.8 is dirt cheap if you want to just see if you can live without zoom and a fast max. aperture instead.

Just a thought, but I think testing out whether a $300-$500 fast prime is going to work for you might be better than zeroing in immediately on $1000+ L f/2.8 zooms.

Also, don't call it a graphic novel shot with your camera. It's a fumetti.

[Quintin]

Thanks for your inputs!

I'd rather keep it to a single lens, if I can. The main reason for this is that I'm not exaggerating when I say the environment will be dusty — we'll possible have to wear respirators to avoid health issues — and I don't want to risk getting my sensor or mirror very dirty. And, of course, I want to have a one-size-fits-all wonderlens. Go figure.

@inkista: I've had a look at the 5mm 1.8, yes - and I think I'll get it. Seriously, that's a dirt cheap lens... and useful and okay in terms of quality, by the sounds of it. Thanks!

And thanks for the correction. Gotta start speaking jive around here, do I?

[inkista]

Nah, nah, nah. I'm just an oldfart who's incredibly nitpicky about terminology. I've been reading comics for 30+ years, and I actually read all of Eddie Campbell's musings on the term "graphic novel" (and everyone else's). Hell, I can remember when Scott McCloud resurrected Eisner's "sequential art" tag, too. There was a minor movement for "drawn books" that never went anywhere, and...

..sorry. wrong board.

[Mr Guy]

Interesting, I'd never heard of that, even after playing with it a little:

http://modelmayhm-6.vo.llnwd.net/d1/...e529725b4c.jpg

[cheap]

Alternative thinking is to use a low noise high ISO body so that you don't have to depend on fast lenses.

[inkista]

I think the fact that every Mac comes with a free copy of Comic Life (there's a Windows version, too) has been responsible for not a few fumettis, these days.

I only learned the term because I'm old/silly enough to own a copy of the Marvel Fumetti Book.

Then again, some comics that I wouldn't call fumettis do use photography and Photoshop manipulation, like some of Dave McKean's work. I'd highly recommend taking a peep at the upcoming Dark Horse reissue of McKean's Pictures That Tick if you want to see digital photo/art collage at a very high level. His stuff always knocks me out.