Full Frame Canon Lenses. Budget £1300 - What do I choose?

G

gmarno

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3
Edit My Images
No
Hi Everyone

I've been lurking for a while doing my research and I've done TONS of searches finding out as much as I can :) I'm looking to go full frame (from a D40x of all things) with a 5D MkII and need some advice on lenses. Here's why I want to upgrade:

- 85% of my photos are landscape and I LOVE wide angle shots (I have a 12-24 which is on my camera about 95% of the time).
- 3 focus points on the D40x is VERY limiting. 9 focus points on the MkII look like more than enough.
- I would like better ISO performance for lower light conditions. I don't do a lot of low light, but when I do, I want some options.
- I'm off to Canada this year for 6 months and I'd like to take a camera that's really going to do the scenery justice. I'm planning on travelling fairly light and a camera is a great (and free) recreational activity.
- I really want something with reasonable video recording capability. Occasionally I'll see something that doesn't translate to a still very well (i.e. an armada of birds in the sky) and I always kick myself when I don't have anything to record it with.
- I've been watching some of the short films/adverts filmed on a 5D/7D and being a very musical person (both playing and recording), I can see myself doing a music video in the future. I've discounted Nikon as their video recording just isn't up to much at the moment.

So, those are the reasons I'm upgrading which I think translate to FF fairly well. I currently have a D40x with the kit lens (18-55) and a 12-24 which has been a good starting base. It's been a great little camera but I've missed a few shots because of the small LCD screen, poor ISO performance etc. I've got some money to burn, I'm going travelling and a camera is a great companion on the road :)

In terms of lenses I'm pretty overwhelmed. I want to get the equivalent of my Nikon 12-24 in FF so that would be something starting around 19mm (I think). I don't want a fish eye as that's not the style of shots I'm after. I'd also like a lens with a little reach as a general walkabout lens, something along the lines of the 24-105.

I have about £1300 to spend on glass(es:)). My options seem to be:

Option A - £1000
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM Lens

Here's my wide angle (10mm cropped equivalent I believe), and it gets good reviews from what I can tell. However, this lens is too short (as far as I know) for everyday walkabout duty when you need a little extra reach. That leaves me about £300 for something else, but I don't really know what's worth buying for the 5d in that price range. Any suggestions? I'd like something with a little bit of reach, maybe up to 100mm.

Option B - ~£1250
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L USM Lens
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM

This gets me most of my wide angle, and a good walkabout solution. I can't really see myself needing more than 105 as I've been surviving on an 18-55 and 12-24 for the past 3 years. I'm also trying to keep the weight down as I have to lug this kit around Canada. There is quite a lot of overlap in the ranges though so I'm just wondering whether this is a good option.

So, I would LOVE some suggestions and advice on what sort of route to take.
 
If you can push to it, how about the 24-70L? 24mm on a FF is nice and wide without going very wide. If you want to do bands then the extra stop over f4 would be good.

If your into landscape then full frame will give you better option as it will give wider shots than the 7D crop without going to 16mm.

The 5D + the 24-105/70 will be a bit bigger than your D40!

Once you get hooked on L glass its all down hill from there, its an addiction!
 
For landscapes I'd go for B and try to fit in 70-200mm f/4L. 16-35mm (if you get good one) is good, but will be too limiting just on it own, and you don't really need f/2.8. I would imagine you would use tripod and f/11.
 
Gaz81 said:
Once you get hooked on L glass its all down hill from there, its an addiction!
Click to expand...

The red line and L designation can be addictive. It must be really hard for those on the dark side as there is no such thing in Nikon line up :razz:
 
Thanks for the replies everyone, I didn't really expect anything tonight. Must be lots of night owls on here like me ;)

I've never actually used FF, so how wide is 24mm? I really want the same kind of effect as 12mm on a crop sensor. I'm a bit concerned that 24mm just isn't going to be wide enough for the shots I like to take. As much as I'd like a 24-70L, I don't think I can justify the expense (and weight) over the 17-40 as I rarely need a 2.8 lens (and I can see the 17mm being more useful for the shots I take over f2.8).

Weight is an issue, but I don't mind carrying around 2 lenses, a body and a spare battery (and maybe a tripod). I'm just very conscious that I have to lug this stuff round with me, so I don't want to add unnecessary weight unless it's going to really add to my shots.

I'm happy to spend money on an L prime in future if I need a lower f-stop lens (which seems likely for doing videos), but for now I'd like a really versatile 2 lens solution (i.e. a wide angle and something with a bit of reach).

How are non L EF lenses? What's the general opinion? For example, I could do a 16-35L II f2.8 and a 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM for about £1300. All L lenses would be nice, but I don't mind as long as the shots come out the same quality :D
 
Can't argue with your reasoning. I have just ordered a 5D2 with 17-40L and 24-105L. I already have 70-200L 4 IS. That is the Canon f/4 trilogy.

24-105L is one of the best reason to go Canon. Nobody else makes a lens like it. IS too.

The alternative f/2.8 line up is expensive and heavy - 16-35L, 24-70L, 70-200L 2.8. Apart from f/2.8, IMHO all those lenses are less attractive than the f/4 range, but if you need f/2.8, they are equally fabulous.

Personally, I wouldn't get the 16-35L. I never use low f/numbers for landscape and apart from higher price/size/weight, it has a bit less range and takes massive 82mm filters. 17-40 and 24-105 are both 77mm.

Edit: your 12mm on Nikon crop is equivalent to 18mm on full frame.
 
If you want to do some video work too, spend some of that money on a fluid head for your tripod. There's some pretty highly rated fairly cheap ones from velbon iirc that will be ok for lighter lenses etc, or some of the lower end manfrotto stuff will be fine too, dslrs are like, the lightest 'good' video cameras available!
 
You could add some primes to a 17-40mm, there relatively small and light , I'm currently using a 17-40mm f4, 50mm f1.4, 85mm f1.8 and 100mm f2.8 and will look to get a 100-400mm f4 in the coming months.

Kerso is currently doing the 17-40mm for approx £520
 
12mm on your Nikon equates to 18mm on FF. (1.5x crop)

If you are really into wide angle photography get a Sigma 12-24 EX DG (will amaze you) and get a 24-105L as a walk around, should just be able to pick those up for your budget.

There are 2 problems with the Sigma though, you have to go and try them out as it there have been copies of this lens that are soft on one side and it is difficult to use normal filters with this lens due to the petal hood (you can use 100mm filters and a bit of blue tack though, worked for me!
 
Go for option 'B' the 24 -105 is a great walkabout lens never off my camera, the 17-40 will give you the wide angle you want (Just) always save up for a sigma 12-24, that works well on my 5D Mk1
 
You could always stick with Nikon you know...the D700 is equally as good as the 5D2. Then go down either the......14-24 2.8 or the 24-70 2.8.

Or if you dont mind second hand 17-35 2.8 can be had for around £850ish
 
I have the 5D II, with the 17-40 and 24-105 (and the 70-200 F4L IS, so basically the same F4L trio as HoppyUK). Superb combination, works very well on full frame - I'd love faster glass but it's usually a fair bit heavier and twice the price!
 
First of all, thank you to everyone to has replied, it's made things much easier (though my wallet doesn't think so) :clap:

itsdavedotnet said:
If you want to do some video work too, spend some of that money on a fluid head for your tripod.....
Click to expand...

Yep, that's on my to buy list (though I may leave until I'm in Canada) :thumbs: I'm not sure whether I'm going to carry a tripod around as I don't at the moment, but we'll see.

EdBray said:
12mm on your Nikon equates to 18mm on FF. (1.5x crop)

If you are really into wide angle photography get a Sigma 12-24 EX DG (will amaze you) and get a 24-105L as a walk around, should just be able to pick those up for your budget.

There are 2 problems with the Sigma though, you have to go and try them out as it there have been copies of this lens that are soft on one side and it is difficult to use normal filters with this lens due to the petal hood (you can use 100mm filters and a bit of blue tack though, worked for me!
Click to expand...

Thanks for the suggestion. I think I'll be pretty happy with a 12mm crop equivalent, but who knows, maybe I'll crack in the future ;)

MarkEvan said:
You could always stick with Nikon you know...the D700 is equally as good as the 5D2. Then go down either the......14-24 2.8 or the 24-70 2.8.

Or if you dont mind second hand 17-35 2.8 can be had for around £850ish
Click to expand...

Yeah I know, but Nikon just doesn't tick the relevant boxes for my requirements. I'd actually prefer to stay with Nikon, but they've dragged their heels on video (though apparently there's an upgrade to the D700 arriving imminently) and that's one of the major plus points on the 5dMkII (for me at least). Even when the new Nikons arrive, I still can't afford to go FF and buy lenses that cover 17-105 for the same price as the L lenses.

With Wilkinsons offering a free 580EX MkII with the 5D lens kit, I may just crack this week and place an order.
 
Yeah I know, but Nikon just doesn't tick the relevant boxes for my requirements. I'd actually prefer to stay with Nikon, but they've dragged their heels on video (though apparently there's an upgrade to the D700 arriving imminently) and that's one of the major plus points on the 5dMkII (for me at least). Even when the new Nikons arrive, I still can't afford to go FF and buy lenses that cover 17-105 for the same price as the L lenses.

With Wilkinsons offering a free 580EX MkII with the 5D lens kit, I may just crack this week and place an order.
Click to expand...


Fair enough I can understand going with the body that ticks all the right boxes, in that case the 5D2 is (from what iv'e heard and seen) a wonderful camera. And the 17-40 is a beautiful landscape lens I think you'll really like it, I did regardless of it 'only' being f4......same story with the 24-105 another great lens.
 
I would certainly say go for the 17-40, it's a cracking lens, but would advise getting a tripod too for landscape work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top