User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Complete lens set up questions.

  1. #1
    Member Audible's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 2009
    Location
    not here
    Posts
    12
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Complete lens set up questions.

    Hello everybody!

    Always good to start with a cheerful greeting. Help put you into a good mood for posting replies!

    Ok, down to business. I'm currently upgrading my camera/lens set up. Refer to my signature for my current gear. The next item I plan to replace is the 24-85mm lens. My initial thought was to replace this with the 24-105mm F4 IS and therefore cover virtually every focal length between 10-400mm with good quality zooms and then add in a couple of specialized primes.
    However, I am thinking about the 24-70mm F2.8 instead of the 24-105mm F4 IS. Trade off naturally being between f2.8 or IS. I somehow don't think I'll need IS at this focal length and the idea of the F2.8 for portraits, bokeh, etc is tempting. I loose the 70-100mm zoom range which I don't think would be much of an issue. Easily cropped from 70mm where needed.

    The other reason for my wondering is the other part on my planned lens line up. A couple of specialized primes such as a macro, portrait and landscape lens.
    As far as overall weight goes, not an issue. The 1.3 kilo weight of the 100-400 doesn't bother me and I can easily carry quite a weight in my shoulder bag as I have carried my camera set up plus a six pack of cans on my shoulder all morning. (where they shift to being carried inside myself & my wife that is! )

    So, the questions then;

    1). 24-105 F4L is or 24-70mm F2.8. Still wondering about the trade off between F4 IS versus F2.8. Any thoughts and info here would be helpful.
    Any other lens I should consider such as the Tamron 28-75, Sigma 28-70 or canon 17-55mm F2.8 IS? Not too keen on the EFS in case I change to a FF later on. 100-400 and 24-70/105 would be keepers and the only lens to change then is the 10-22mm.

    2). Primes. What, if any primes should I consider to go with 3 decent zooms? Will I get any benefit from say for example, an macro prime lens that can do portrait as well compared to using a teleconvertor or macro rings with the above zoom lens? How about a prime for landscapes? 35mm? 20mm? suggestions?

    Thanks for reading and any help you can offer!

  2. #2
    Ausphotography Site Sponsor/Advertiser DAdeGroot's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Feb 2009
    Location
    Cedar Creek, Qld, Australia
    Posts
    1,890
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well firstly, you won't lose the 70-100mm range, as you have a 70-200/4L

    Secondly, either of the 24mm zooms would do you, both are excellent lenses. The deciding factor should be what type of light you'll be shooting under. The IS on the 24-105 is supposedly good for 3 stops, which puts it 2 stops ahead of the 24-70 for low light (if you subject isn't moving).
    However, f/2.8 can indeed be handy for the smoother background effect.

    As for primes, my advice is (if money isn't an issue), 35/1.4L, 85/1.2L and 135/2L. They are the holy trinity of Canon fast primes, and their reputation is well deserved.

    However, if you want/need a macro, ditch the 135 and get the 100L IS.
    Dave

    http://www.degrootphotography.com.au/
    Canon EOS 1D MkIV | Canon EOS 5D MkII | Canon EOS 30D | Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM | Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM | Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM | Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM | Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM | Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L & some non-L lenses.

  3. #3
    Member
    Threadstarter
    Audible's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 2009
    Location
    not here
    Posts
    12
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Oops. My bad. 70-200mm was sold last week on e-bay. Updated signature.

    DAdeGroot

    Those primes are a bit out of my budget. is the "holy trinity of primes" good for FF, crop or both? Could I step down to the cheaper versions ok?

    On the subject of the 24-xxx zoom. Well I've never had any problems really with the 24-85mm, apart from the barrel distortions, softness, apeture, etc, etc. Anything better than that lens I think will be a bonus. There are times where I would like IS to freeze moving targets such as in close motorsports, and times when I want the Back ground blur. I could almost toss a coin between the two.
    Last edited by Audible; 05-03-2010 at 6:34pm.

  4. #4
    Member sonofcoco's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Sep 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm in a similar dilemma myself at the moment, I have the 17-85mm EF-s, the 70-200mm f/4, the nifty fifty and the 100mm macro. Am looking at replacing the kit lens eventually and would like to get the 24-70L f/2.8 or the 24-105mm f/4 at some stage...was originally looking at getting the 17-40 f/4, but have looked around on the net and rediscovered the 10-22mm or the Tokina 11-16mm. Now I have decisions to make. Will probably go with the 10-22mm as it gives me more width and is a decent match up when I eventually get a 24- whatever mm lens. I'll look to get the 24-XX(X) later on. Doesn't seem to make sense to get the 24-XX(X) now and not be any wider, plus I think the 10-22mm will be fun to play with.

    I'm not going to get a FF camera for a while (I have a 40D), have uni and being poor to contend with first, and will hopefully just sell the 10-22mm and upgrade to the 17-40 or 16-35 then.

    Feels better talking about it

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •