handicap18
<font color=blue>Husband, father of 3, and Disney
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2005
- Messages
- 4,860
An 80-200 f/2.8 lens would without a doubt give the OP more versatility to frame the shot how she wanted. However, I chose the $100 option vs the $1,000 option when recommending a low light lens. Its all a give and take when it comes to lenses and now the OP knows the pros and cons of both.
I partially threw the nifty fifty out there because I think (IMHO) that every Rebel owner should have one.
I completely agree. While it would be great that we could all get ourselves a 70 or 80 -200mm f/2.8 lens, for many of us it just isn't in the budget. It would be one thing if one plans to take the pics as the official photographer and then sell them to the other families. I'm guessing that the majority of us don't have the time or the initial investment opportunity to accomplish this. Thus recommending the 50mm f/1.8 to others with a Canon or Nikon dSLR to get this lens is a very good idea. Especially for those with situations as the OP, who has the kit or kit type lens and a long inexpensive zoom for the lens set-up. The 50mm f/1.8 is a great inexpensive 3rd lens to add to your camera bag if your like most of us, a regular ol' amerture photographer/hobbiest. $80-120 to spend is a lot more realistic for many of us compared to $800-1700.