Canon 5D + My Photography... Lens Advice Please!

captures.in.time

captures.in.time

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,764
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all

I have been thinking my lens set up for my photography is not right... I constantly seem to be swapping lenses and just feel there must be a better combo out there for me... I'll explain my current situation and then i'd really appreciate your opinions.

I recently... a year ago bought a Canon 5d... finally moving into digital from the world of slide film... I was happy using slide film with my EOS 3 but the processing and scanning time was taking ages... and to be honest the fun in photography for me is capturing the image... not sitting at home in front of computers scanning etc etc... Digital is just so instant... The final nail in the coffin was my two weeks solid scanning my South Aftica shots.

I went for the 5D mainly due to the fact its full frame and was very similar to the EOS 3 I loved. I currently have the following lenses- Sigma 15-30mm, Canon 28-135is and Canon 75-300is. I have had all these lenses for a few years as originally got them as the set up for my EOS 3. I also had a Sigma 28-300 superzoom which seemed a good idea at the time and although its focal range meant not much lens changing it was slow and i just was not impressed. Its still an ok lens that said and i gave it to my fiancee as she is just starting out with a 450d. I love travel/ reportage type photography. My goal is to try and capture the sights sounds and smells of a place so the viewer feels they have been there... thats the aim anyway. I also love Landscape photography. I rtarely use my 300mm end but I would always like to have that power.. somehow!

So based on that... if you where me... what lenses would you get if you where buying a set to suit my needs??? Would you keep any of the ones I have??? I am thinking I also need some canon L series glass in my life... that would prob be my last big step up as a keen amature??? My main gripe with my current kit is that I always wish I had that little bit extra at the wide angle on my standard zoom but keeping the 135mm telephoto at the other end. I find I end up changing from the 15 - 30mm and the 28 - 135 all the time... which when travelling gets annoying... although im not saying even if I moved down to something at 24mm id stop carryingthe 15 - 30mm...

Oh and lets assume money is not a problem for the purpose of this discussion... just makes it a bit easier... theres always visa!

So what would your ideas lens combo or thoughts be in my situation????
 
I don't think you'll get one lens of quality to cover everything from 15-135mm.
Perhaps the EOS 24-105L would be a good compromise. On FF its a good walkaround lens and of course, it is an 'L' which you asked about. 24mm is wide on FF, but if you wanted wider, then the 17-40L is also excellent. At the longer end the 70-200mm models are also highly regarded.
Like everything else in photography, there will be those who think L lenses are an extravagance and claim that those using them do so for prestige. That may be so with some owners, I don't know. What I do know is that when I bought my first L several years ago, I was blown away by the quality.
HTH
 
I agree with everything haggis said. You won't get one decent lens to cover that entire range. Once you go below about 24/28mm, that starts putting quite serious requirements on the lens designers and it becomes impossible in a practical sense to fit a very-wide-angle and a telephoto in the same package.

The 24-105L is a great everyday lens on a 5D. It sounds like it's not a huge amount wider than your 28-135, but those extra 4mm at the wide end really punch above their weight. Plus you get an extra stop (f/4 vs f/5.6) at the long end which is helpful in poor light.

If you want to upgrade your Sigma 15-30, the 17-40L is very good - and if money really is no object then the 16-35L is even better. (And as for the 14mm prime .... there's a good reason it costs £1700!)

The various 70-200L models (f/4 or f/2.8, with or without IS) are all absolutely superb.

If you really really want to try do do everything (or everything apart from the ultra-wide stuff) with one lens, then you need to be looking at the 28-300L. Big, heavy, expensive (£1800), but it manages the compromises inherent in the design of a 10x superzoom amazingly well.
 
Hey again...

You have both mentioned the lenses I was thinking of getting... that might improve things for me both with quality and focal length... I think the 24 - 105 would be a good option for me as I rarely prob twist past 100mm but always just want that wee bit more at the bottom end... the 4mm will prob do it and this will... once my wedding is over next year and iv got disposable income back be my first thought for what to blow money on...

I'll probably just keep the sigma 15 - 30mm... I like it and it offers acceptable images... I know its not everyones fav lens and it is getting on a bit now... but I actually dont have issues with my use of this lens... so if its not broken... why fix.

The famous 70 - 200mm im surprised carlsberg dont make this as they normally make the best things in the world dont they!? I see allot of these and I know for good reason... This prob would be a good option for me... after the 24 - 105mm but what about adding a teleconverter with it... probably the x2... good option or not? Do they have a real deterioating effect on the lens results?

Are the L series lenses really better than the other glass... for example my 28 - 135 vs 24 - 105... any tests compairing them?
 
When prices come down and I can afford to go to full frame I think my lens choice would be the 24-105, which I'm sure would sit on the camera 95% of the time. A 20mm prime, for those rare occasions where the 24mm wasn't quite wide enough. Even though I like to take mostly landscape shots I can't imagine there will be many occasions where I'll be needing to go wider than 20mm. If I felt the need to get anything longer than 105mm I might go for another prime, perhaps 200mm.
 
markelliot said:
Hey again...
I'll probably just keep the sigma 15 - 30mm... I like it and it offers acceptable images... I know its not everyones fav lens and it is getting on a bit now... but I actually dont have issues with my use of this lens... so if its not broken... why fix.

The famous 70 - 200mm im surprised carlsberg dont make this as they normally make the best things in the world dont they!? I see allot of these and I know for good reason... This prob would be a good option for me... after the 24 - 105mm but what about adding a teleconverter with it... probably the x2... good option or not? Do they have a real deterioating effect on the lens results?

Are the L series lenses really better than the other glass... for example my 28 - 135 vs 24 - 105... any tests compairing them?
Click to expand...

The Canon Extenders won't work on the 24-105, you'd need an independant make such as Kenko, just make sure it is the Pro Plus version. Bear in mind you'll lose two stops of light making it f8. I can't remember off hand, but I think you will lose AF.
As for a comparison of the two lenses, can you get to a camera shop and take some test shots? That would probably be your best option.
 
markelliot said:
Are the L series lenses really better than the other glass... for example my 28 - 135 vs 24 - 105... any tests compairing them?
Click to expand...

This is always an interesting comparison. The 28-135 and 24-105L were both heavily produced and seem to have large copy variations which can lead to diverse opinions of their merits.

Based on the ones I've tried (still have a 28-135 for Mrs CB) then the 28-135 was sharper...quite a surprise...but that's where it ends. The contrast and bokeh of the 24-105L is really in the next league and, if you're happy with the 28-135 on your 5D, you'll be thrilled with the results of the 24-105. It's simply the lack of contrast that kept the 28-135 off my 5D.

The 28-300L is a useful range but it's a push/pull zoom. Staying away from my personal preference of rotary zooms, push pull zooms have an inherent dust ingestion problem. Many people have the problem and many don't but it's worth remembering that a FF sensor has 2.65x the chance of catching any dust when compared to a crop sensor.

Bob
 
happy haggis said:
The Canon Extenders won't work on the 24-105, you'd need an independant make such as Kenko, just make sure it is the Pro Plus version. Bear in mind you'll lose two stops of light making it f8. I can't remember off hand, but I think you will lose AF.
As for a comparison of the two lenses, can you get to a camera shop and take some test shots? That would probably be your best option.
Click to expand...

sorry... that was not clear... I was thinking of the teleconverter with the 70 to 200mm....

Anyone any views on their use tith the lens... my first thought is does the IS still work?
 
If I was to get a full frame camera, it would be to get the full FOV from my 50mm 1.4 and the 17-40L. 17mm is seriously wide on a full frame camera.
 
markelliot said:
sorry... that was not clear... I was thinking of the teleconverter with the 70 to 200mm....

Anyone any views on their use tith the lens... my first thought is does the IS still work?
Click to expand...
Haven't used the combination, but IS will still work. :)
 
Another vote for the 24-105mm. Ok it's only f4 which makes it a bit of an expensive doorstop in low light but if that's not what you are shooting then it's a great walkabout lens on a 5D and does people pics and landscapes very well indeed, colours and contrast just jump at you.

Try before you buy though. :)
 
markelliot said:
I was thinking of the teleconverter with the 70 to 200mm....

Anyone any views on their use tith the lens... my first thought is does the IS still work?
Click to expand...
IS will always work with a TC.

AF will only work if your effective maximum aperture is f/5.6 or better. (f/8 or better on a 1D-series camera, but f/5.6 for us mortals.) So a 70-200 f/2.8 will AF with a 1.4x or a 2x TC, but a 70-200 f/4 will only AF with a 1.4x TC and not with a 2x TC.
 
What are the alternatives to a 70-200 IS f2.8 pluss a 2x teleconverter then...cause that is stacking up in price and it looks like that is te combination id be happy with as i'd always want my autofocus to work and as i've got a 5d according to the last post this is the only combo I could go for that would give me full autofocus covering the 100-300 range...

Is there any other alternatives which could be better than my 75-300 IS which I think is the older model as i'v had it for at least 5 years now.

Is sigma worth looking at...

Also weight is an issue is the 70 - 200 + 2x converter big... size and weight im thinking as I do a bit of travel photography... but then its optical performance could be a comprimise for weight...

I think im decided the 24 - 105 will be my first purchase in the upgrade though... Although anyone any other ideas?

M
 
I did some test shots with a 70-200L f4 IS and a 1.4x converter (which still allows AF) HERE

If money was no object I would go with 14L 35L 50L 85L 135L 200L, but as money is an object for me I have gone with a Sigma 12-24, 24-70L, 50 f1.4, 70-200L f2.8 IS & 1.4x Converter, don't regret my choices and they are all great on my 5D2.
 
I just worry that a 1.4x converter will not give me enough pulling power.... and I like the idea of having 400mm capacity rather than 280mm. So is it true that on a 5D a 2x converter and 70-200IS f4 would not work as my autofocus would not operate? Just id prob get away with the f4 model as i dont do that much low light high speed shutter stuff...

M
 
My advice ... simplify. Stick a prime lens on your camera, just one, and spend a day out with it. Instead of looking here there and everywhere for photos because you're armed with a 15-400 range, you narrow your view to photos that fit your lens, and as result, see more.
 
markelliot said:
I just worry that a 1.4x converter will not give me enough pulling power.... and I like the idea of having 400mm capacity rather than 280mm. So is it true that on a 5D a 2x converter and 70-200IS f4 would not work as my autofocus would not operate? Just id prob get away with the f4 model as i dont do that much low light high speed shutter stuff...

M
Click to expand...
Yes it's true, the IQ of the 70-200 plus 2x isn't great, AF doesn't work unless you have a 1D series body when it will (manual focus only on all others).

Hacker's suggestion is a good one

Canon 5D 70-200L f4 IS + 1.4x converter ISO 1600 wide open

mad1.jpg
 
WeddingHack said:
My advice ... simplify. Stick a prime lens on your camera, just one, and spend a day out with it. Instead of looking here there and everywhere for photos because you're armed with a 15-400 range, you narrow your view to photos that fit your lens, and as result, see more.
Click to expand...

I did that for a week Duncan and it's a really good lesson. You do start to look at things a little differently. And you certainly move about more!

I used a 50mm f1.8 and limited myself to that. Try it, you will find it invaluable. :)
 
Im not new to photography... I've been at it since I was 10! I learnt originally after I took an interest in my grandads hobby... I started off with a pentax K1000, 24mm and 50mm lenses... so I think you are both right about starting out... simplify... I had to learn about reciprical laws etc with my fully manual camera... I think its good for everyone to learn that way... back to first principals... I certainly see that with my fiancee... she jumper into SLR photography with a 450D and to be honest although the functions make it easier... its taken allot more explanation about the principals than i ever remember my grandad teaching me... One of the best moments in my life still has to be at 12... when I put that paper in the developing tray and the image apeared for the first time!

I guess the world has moved on... and there is nothing wrong with it.. I've often thought of getting a nifty 50 for my camera again... and sometimes do wish I had not dropped that K1000... but I guess all im saying as im assuming some of you probably didn't know I had a proper manual background... im not an equipment junki whatsoever...It took me years to be convinced to go digital and im glad i held off for soo long... I think i just feel im in a place to make my final step up in equipment ... although a bit of me still likes the thought of buying a fixed lens compact retro leica 35mm... but crazy prices...

Anyway back to my original question... anyone any other thoughts on the quality lenses available to me... am i wrong to just think L series... I guess im hankering for 400mm as i would like to venture into doing more wildlife stuff... and anything i've done that's been real wild stuff... I've always found 300mm sometimes just is a bit short... tinking stags in my home scotland... or safari in africa.

M
 
my wife shoots weddings with a 5D and a 24-105L.
it rarely comes off the camera.she absolutely loves it.
she,s also got the 100-400L IS.(expensive, but worth it).
to be honest, apart from realy low light coditions, i dont think she needs anything else.
we tend to stick the 18-50 f2.8 sigma on the 30D, if its realy murky.
next year may see a 24-70L 2.8 appearing.
shes even tried the nifty fifty on it. actualy produced some pretty good results.
my fav lens on my 30D is actualy an IS 17-85 canon..
beats the c**p out of the poor kit lens (18-55 i think).
dont you lose about two stops if you put a 2x convertor on a 100-400.
200-800 for africa mark?and i,m pretty sure you keep IS and autofocus.
 
Ok... ok... that 100-400 actually looks a great alternative to the 70- 200 for me... I'd prob be ok with it only being f4... and the price whilst allot would work out cheaper than the 70 - 200IS f2.8 option which id prob go for if I was going as it gives me more scope for use...

Is it optically as good as the 70-200???

Is the 100-400 a monster to carry??? It's double the weight of my 75 - 300!

I guess I could always keep my 75 - 300mm... I actually dont use telephoto that much and maybe im just planning spending money for the sake of it im starting to think... certainly with that lens anyway... although i do want to get into nature stuff more... I'll maybe post another thread on my telephoto dilema and get specific answers for that...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top