RF 15-35mm f2.8

[billmac]

Hi
A question for you

I am thing of trading in my Canon RF 70-200mm for RF 15-35mm I have the RF 24-105mm f4 L and the 100-500mm and I want the 15-35mm for landscape is this a good idea or should I keep my 70-200mm and save up for the 15-35mm.

 

[Julian Elliott]

I think it depends on what you're ultimate goal is.

One thing Lightroom is good for is seeing how often you use a focal length. You can filter your catalog by focal length to see how often you use a particular one.

 

[Unicronatron]

Some questions to think about :

What do you shoot with the 70-200?

How often do you use it?

How often would you use the 15-35?

Your other lenses can cover the 70-200 focal length range so can you use your other lenses instead or not practical?

How long will it take you to save for the 15-35?

Would you end up buying the 70-200 again?

 

[SFTPhotography]

I think trade it as your other glass cover that FL range. A wide zoom is a useful thing to own for landscapes.

 

[Eljay]

If you don't have to sell then don't. If it won't take you long to save for it then save for it. The 70-200 is a very useful lens. Very.

You can never have too many lenses.

 

[SFTPhotography]

The 70-200 is a very useful lens. Very.

You can never have too many lenses.

And then there is that excellent chain of thought

I scrub my post...keep it and just buy the other. If you find you never use it then maybe sell it then.

 

[ABTog]

Do you need the f2.8?
The only point where f2.8 is actually needed (I find at least) is for dark interiors and astro. Personally, I have a 17-35mm but rarely use it. I can shoot all day on the 24-105.
There is an f4 wide angle on the way which will be cheaper but it may be a while.
You could sell the 70-200 and buy the 15-35 f2.8, then if you find you miss having a 70-200, you could buy the new RF70-200 f4 IS, which will be cheaper and lighter.
But since you already have 24-105 and 100-500 covered, you'd probably be ok without the 70-200, unless you do event/wedding photography.

 

[justinminns]

You have the 70-200mm focal lengths covered but there are other considerations...
Is the 100-500mm heavy? You might not want to lug that around instead of the 70-200mm
Do you need the faster aperture of the 70-200mm?

I know its not a cheap lens but personally I'd keep the 70-200mm and get by with the 24-105mm for landscapes until I could afford to add the 15-35mm. Actually I wouldn't I'd sell the 100-500mm but that wasn't your question!