Chris ™
Veteran Member
50mm is a great alrounder, but choose the f1.4 over the 1.8, which has focus issues. Many upgraded from the el cheapo to the 1.4, so invest the 100 bucks in the right one ;-) The higher price is definitely worth it.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
6D - Lens Thoughts for a Non-Profesisonal
- Thread starter ekko
- Start date
-
- Tags
- canon eos 6d
100% agree with this remark.
Rick Knepper
Forum Pro
There is no magic gate between pro and non-pro Canon camera equipment (the 1D X and a few of the long lenses being the possible exceptions).
I just bought the same 6D deal to replace my 5D2. According to DxO, the 6D noses out the 5D3 in IQ. Even if this weren't true, the 6D is still good enough for many folks' needs. You are considering a lens that may not allow your camera to produce its best work.
Check the Canon Price Watch every week or more and look for the next coupon promotion and use it on the 25-105.
http://www.canonpricewatch.com/canon-refurb-stock-tracker/
Rick Knepper, photographer, non-professional, shooting for pleasure, check my profile for gear list and philosophy. Just say NO! to MAIL-IN REBATES.
I just bought the same 6D deal to replace my 5D2. According to DxO, the 6D noses out the 5D3 in IQ. Even if this weren't true, the 6D is still good enough for many folks' needs. You are considering a lens that may not allow your camera to produce its best work.
I recommend a minimum of a 24-105 in a zoom. It's not a $1k lens when it is refurbed.
Why not? I can't personally recommend it since I haven't used one, but some are claiming it is sharp and if you get it for the $149 it sells for all of the time, even if you outright lose it, you are not out much.A) Fairly cheap lens that will produce OK results and give me some opportunity to learn different focal lengths, f-stops, etc.
B) Waste of $300 that would be better applied elsewhere. For example I thought about the 40mm Canon STM and then just using my legs to zoom.
Check the Canon Price Watch every week or more and look for the next coupon promotion and use it on the 25-105.
http://www.canonpricewatch.com/canon-refurb-stock-tracker/
--
Rick Knepper, photographer, non-professional, shooting for pleasure, check my profile for gear list and philosophy. Just say NO! to MAIL-IN REBATES.
Last edited:
I used to own 17-40L but sold it. Now 17mm TS-E is my UWA lens. Another option is to use 17-40L and 70-200L/4.0 IS together and you can fill gap between 40 and 70mm by moving your foot or with a 50mm lens. My 24-105L had err01 in 2nd day of Italy trip last year so I used the other two lenses I mentioned and didn't feel miss much. Only issue is that 17-40L doesn't have 'IS' and is not very sharp at edges at f/4.0 wide open.
Sure.
Everyone picks up whatever he/she feels the right that ultimately matter.
Disagreed. 24-105L meets a L lens standard including in IQ that certainly better than aged 28-300L for example. I have many photos from 24-105L that are so sharp with nice color contrast.
24-105L on 5D1 hand-held pano
5000-pixel wide that is almost in full-size, still pretty sharp from 24-105L
Most of my old photos were taken from this 24-105L on 5D1. There are lots of happy owners of this lens that you can read from this thread
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3338024#forum-post-50307683
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/
http://qianp2k.zenfolio.com/
Last edited:
Chris ™
Veteran Member
... the 70-200 lenses have not enough zoom for birds or motorsport.
So I will replace my 75-300IS with a 70-300L.
So I will replace my 75-300IS with a 70-300L.
The Light Stalker
Senior Member
Hey everyone I wanted a little input. I'm a non-professional that took advantage of the 6D refurbished sale for $1215 that others had mentioned. I've played around with point and shoots, owned several Canon G series, and also been borrowing some DSLr lately and really enjoy the experience. Goal would be to document family in the short term, and then expand/learn from there. Obviously great picture quality is a long term goal hence the 6D platform, but I'd like to rent some of these $1k + lenses over the next months-year before buying.
In the interim I was hoping for some advice.
With the same sale I could get the refurbished Canon EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM for a little over $300. Now I know this is probably second class to some of the newer lenses, but given I'm not Pro and more beginner in the space I'm curious if this is more like:
A) Fairly cheap lens that will produce OK results and give me some opportunity to learn different focal lengths, f-stops, etc.
B) Waste of $300 that would be better applied elsewhere. For example I thought about the 40mm Canon STM and then just using my legs to zoom.
Thanks for any input. I know this is a little beginner oriented, but given the 6D has the ISO capabilities I thought asks about lenses with f/3.5 max would be better addressed from the experts here.
I vote for option A.
Don't let the lens snobs talk you out of this lens, it's a good lens. Sure there are better out there but this one will cut the mustard just fine. I know of several pros out there making their living with this lens. It's like any other tool, know it's limitations and work within them. This one needs to be stopped down a little for max sharpness, but wide open it's not horrible.
Roger
Sure 70-300L IS is more versatile than 70-200L/4.0 IS.
Then sometime 300mm is not enough and you will need at least 400mm. New 100-400L that has been rumored for years might get announced next year together with 7D II. Old 100-400L which still can deliver very sharp photos now can be bought at $1350 in USA that is unbelievable.
Canon also needs to update its UWA zoom that getting older - 17-40L and 16-35L II with at least one 'IS' version as Nikon did and the new 14-24L/2.8. That's one of reasons I sold 17-40L. Hope Canon replaced it with 16-40L/4.0 IS that is sharp from edge to edge and still relative light/small. Then I might consider to buy back such one.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/
http://qianp2k.zenfolio.com/
Last edited:
Chris ™
Veteran Member
The 100-400 is definitely great, no matter if the current or a future model, but the 70-300L is smaller and lighter and when it comes to birds e.g., even 400mm is not much. I think a lighter lens with a teleconverter is the better choice, if you want to travel as light as possible and have 600mm reach ;-)
I have a 28-135, and a 24-105L, and a 6D. In my testing, the 28-135 is closer to the sharpness of the 24-105 than the DXO testing numbers might suggest. In fact, when used handheld, at the same aperture and focal length, I think most observers would not be able to choose which lens was used to produce a given landscape shot, even at the pixel level.
Sharpness is not the only factor in lens selection though. The 24-105 feels more solid. In my opinion, it has a more pleasant bokeh wide open. I also love the constant f/4 aperture, and it's really nice to have a lens that doesn't physically extend when you zoom. So if I had to give one up, it would be the 28-135. But, I don't have to give up the 28-135, and when I'm shooting something like a car race, I would probably take it over the 24-105L. I'd want the extra reach, and also feel better about exposing that lens to bumps and scrapes in the crowd.
It sort of reminds me of the choice between the 50 f/1.8 and the 50 f/1.4. In many cases, the cheaper lens will work out just as well as the more expensive one. But there are situations when the more expensive lens will produce superior results, so you just have to decide if you will ever need those special case results.
Sharpness is not the only factor in lens selection though. The 24-105 feels more solid. In my opinion, it has a more pleasant bokeh wide open. I also love the constant f/4 aperture, and it's really nice to have a lens that doesn't physically extend when you zoom. So if I had to give one up, it would be the 28-135. But, I don't have to give up the 28-135, and when I'm shooting something like a car race, I would probably take it over the 24-105L. I'd want the extra reach, and also feel better about exposing that lens to bumps and scrapes in the crowd.
It sort of reminds me of the choice between the 50 f/1.8 and the 50 f/1.4. In many cases, the cheaper lens will work out just as well as the more expensive one. But there are situations when the more expensive lens will produce superior results, so you just have to decide if you will ever need those special case results.
Chris ™
Veteran Member
Thanks for your report. Maybe we should mention, that there's some variation in the 28-135IS ... in other words, there are some lemons out there, which explains, why some people love it and others hate it.
Regarding Bokeh ... I think it has very nice smooth Bokeh.
Ok, the build quality fell plastic like, but it'sn't bad ... sure, not as solid as L lenses ... but lighter ;-)
Regarding Bokeh ... I think it has very nice smooth Bokeh.
Ok, the build quality fell plastic like, but it'sn't bad ... sure, not as solid as L lenses ... but lighter ;-)
Mais78
Senior Member
It doesn't make sense to buy a Ferrari and then drive it on cheap tyres. The best way to save you money is to buy a good lens now rather than later.Hey everyone I wanted a little input. I'm a non-professional that took advantage of the 6D refurbished sale for $1215 that others had mentioned. I've played around with point and shoots, owned several Canon G series, and also been borrowing some DSLr lately and really enjoy the experience. Goal would be to document family in the short term, and then expand/learn from there. Obviously great picture quality is a long term goal hence the 6D platform, but I'd like to rent some of these $1k + lenses over the next months-year before buying.
In the interim I was hoping for some advice.
With the same sale I could get the refurbished Canon EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM for a little over $300. Now I know this is probably second class to some of the newer lenses, but given I'm not Pro and more beginner in the space I'm curious if this is more like:
A) Fairly cheap lens that will produce OK results and give me some opportunity to learn different focal lengths, f-stops, etc.
B) Waste of $300 that would be better applied elsewhere. For example I thought about the 40mm Canon STM and then just using my legs to zoom.
Thanks for any input. I know this is a little beginner oriented, but given the 6D has the ISO capabilities I thought asks about lenses with f/3.5 max would be better addressed from the experts here.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum