Lens Question

a1ex2001

a1ex2001

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,780
Name
Alex
Edit My Images
Yes
Appologies if this gets a little long winded!

Over the summer I upgraded to a full fram 5D mkii at the time of purchase I needed a walk about lens to get me going quickly as I had a trip so I picked up a cheap Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 but I had always planned on getting a 24-70mm f2.8 L once funds allowed. I've just about saved the money but I'm having doubts!

I played with a 24-70mm L and it's only when you have it on the camera you realise just how big and heavy it is which is putting my right off at the minute as I really enjoyed how light and usable the camer is with the Tamron lens which to be honest is a very good lens.

This has led me to think of the following three options for lens combos going forwards that work out about the same cost:

1. 24-70mm f2.8L, existing 70-210mm f4 to give me reach and my 50mm f1.8 to give me a fast standard lens.

2. 24-105 f4L, existing 70-210mm f4 to give me reach and my 50mm f1.8 and a 35mm f2.0 to cover me for low light

3. 17-40mm f4L, existing 28-75mm Tamron, existing 70-210mm f4 to give me reach and my 50mm f1.8 and a 35mm f2.0 to cover me for low light and added prime goodness.

Which lineup would you go for and why?
 
Find myself not using prime much theses days.

So it would be No1 for me,on my camera a Nikon the 24-70mm F2.8 is on my camera most of the time.

:)
 
Don't forget the 5d2 is metal and is hevesy buy it self never mind with lens, wack a 85 1.4 and youl know weight
 
Blimey - I had to look up the Canon 70-210 as I'd never heard of it.
It's not even listed on slrgear.com, the main review I found was a review by Ken Rockwell !!!
Looks like a bit of a bargain.

There's no reason NOT to add the nifty fifty to your bag.
At the price, there's nothing that can touch it.
Then if you feel the need for shallow DoF or are struggling with low light, then you have a handy solution.

Having just upgraded to your 5DII, you will be appreciating just how much wider 24mm really is on full frame!
Hence, only you can answer if you need to go wider. My widest lens is 24mm and I rarely need to stitch to go wider.
I think the long end of the lens is where you stand to gain most, especially if you get IS.
 
Personally I would go for the 25-105 over the 24-70. I tried both and preferred the 24-105. This was purely down to IQ on the samples I tried - note I have no use for F2.8 or less on short lenses as I rarely go more open than F8, but that's just me.
Now when it comes to long (500mm +) lenses then I would love F2.8+, but that is an impossible dream! Too heavy - let alone the price!
 
24-105/4 here too, complemented by fast primes. With good ISO 6400 the f/4 will go a long way and the 24-70 can't touch the primes anyway.
 
The heavier the camera and lens the steadier it can be held I have found. Also it can help to build up arm muscles. :lol::lol::lol:

Realspeed
 
I've just got a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 HSM and it's a cracker. I was a bit unsure because of the Sigma rep for quality, but I've got 2 long Sigma lenses already and they're both excellent quality so that's what swung it for me. It complements my Canon 70-200 f2.8 L MkII perfectly and gives me just as good IQ on my 5D3 and 60D. Not tried it on the wifes 650D yet, but I'm not really worried now knowing how good it is on the others.

I was torn between the Sigma, a second hand Canon 24-70 L and the Tamron 28-75 but ended up going for the Sigma for the 24 end and the price compared to the Canon. I might end up going for a Canon 24-70 MkII in time, but it wont be for a good while yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top