Great body/lens pairs

photonius wrote:

I think you are approaching this from the wrong angle.

You have to first ask yourselves:

What focal length and aperture do I want/need?

You have already the 50mm f1.8. So, what can you not do with it? And could you achieve that with another lens?

Then you look for suitable lenses. You will get a list, and then choose based on price and performance. It's not an issue of "great body/lens pairs". A better lens will give better results on recent bodies, no matter what.

Thanks for the thoughts. I wanted to make this thread more than just about my specific needs. So, even though I am currently considering lenses in the wide angle to short telephoto range, I'm also interested in others' experiences with lenses in other lenses, and I figured other owners like me would be as well.

Ok, so, coming back to the DxoMark scores, I also chime in there that one has to take these single scores with a huge grain of salt.

I don't look at scores as an absolute. In fact, I always look at the "scores within the scores". This thread had the unfortunate result of going off-tangent in a discussion about whether there are or are not lenses that are able to outperform the Canon APS-C sensors. I still believe there are. Looking at the resolving power of,the Sigma 85mm Art, for example, one sees that it hits 4,000 lines on a top Canon FF body, the 5DS R, it can't get half that on a 7D. My point was to highlight the difference with an extreme case. But there are still substantial differences in lesser bodies. The 5D MkIV bests 2500. (In the interest of brevity, I am referring to just one measure,ent at one setting, but the rest of the data validates the point.)

I guess a better way to express it is to say who would but a $9000 lens on a $500 body? Or, on a lower-end (but still quite good) camera, there may be some incremental improvement with a very high-end lens, but most of what the lens has to offer is wasted on the less-capable body, so why bother? This the question is about good lens/body pairs.

The Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 looks like a nice upgrade over the Canon kit 18-55. I have found that I am doing a large amount of shooting with the 10-18 and 18-55. The 10-18 seems to acquit itself well against the Sigma 10-20 and the 12-24 Art doesn't have the wider reach or pair as well with the 18-55 and similar mid-range zooms and at 5x the price, doesn't seem to justify itself on an APS-C body when Lightroom does a great job correcting the Canon's deficiencies with one click.

One lens I would seriously consider would be an EF lens in the 24-85mm range, plus or minus, with an f/2.8 or so maximum aperture that performs very well. A lens like that would justify its purchase by becoming my daily-use lens if I upgraded to a FF body. Such a lens would be worth its seemingly astronomical price (for an APS-C body pairing).