Lens Upgrades, what to do...

Hello!

I'm looking for some advice to help figure out my lens collection. I'm reconsidering which to keep in my collection and whether they should be upgraded/replaced.

A little bit o' context about my kit:

- 10-18mm: primarily for astrophotography and landscapes but recently I've found the sharpness disappointing for video. I can't decide if I want to let go of the wide...ness

- 24mm: absolutely love it and I hope to primarily use it for filmmaking

- 50mm: The one lens I'm never letting go of ;-) When I have the budget I will absolutely consider the f1.4 version instead though (what a gem)

- 55-250mm: it's always blown me away but I've been thinking it's time to transition to a 70-200 or my dream 100-400 to increase the quality of my pictures and start the transition to full frame (starting to consider this).

For the last year or so I've been feeling like I'm missing a general zoom but I've never been able to decide whether it's worth it. I have different purposes for my lenses but I've been told by many fellow photographers that having so many lenses isn't the way to go, especially as I shoot in professional scenarios (another reason for upgrading). My current considerations for general zooms are the 16-35 or the 24-70, both I know are exceptional lenses.

My only concern is, will getting a general zoom make some of my lenses redundant and is it just an unnecessary purchase when I have such a range already?

Apologies for the book! Any advice about these lenses is welcome, just need some help deciding what's best.

Thanks

inevitablyissie said:

Hello!

I'm looking for some advice to help figure out my lens collection. I'm reconsidering which to keep in my collection and whether they should be upgraded/replaced.

A little bit o' context about my kit:

- 10-18mm: primarily for astrophotography and landscapes but recently I've found the sharpness disappointing for video. I can't decide if I want to let go of the wide...ness

Click to expand...

Don't let go of the wide...ness. The 10-22 might solve your problems, better glass and a stop faster, but no IS or STM for video. The focus transitions will be like your other USM lenses.

- 24mm: absolutely love it and I hope to primarily use it for filmmaking

inevitablyissie said:

- 50mm: The one lens I'm never letting go of ;-) When I have the budget I will absolutely consider the f1.4 version instead though (what a gem)

- 55-250mm: it's always blown me away but I've been thinking it's time to transition to a 70-200 or my dream 100-400 to increase the quality of my pictures and start the transition to full frame (starting to consider this).

Click to expand...

Follow your dreams. The 100-400 is actually all it's cracked up to be.

inevitablyissie said:

For the last year or so I've been feeling like I'm missing a general zoom but I've never been able to decide whether it's worth it. I have different purposes for my lenses but I've been told by many fellow photographers that having so many lenses isn't the way to go, especially as I shoot in professional scenarios (another reason for upgrading). My current considerations for general zooms are the 16-35 or the 24-70, both I know are exceptional lenses.

Click to expand...

Those are great FF lenses. The focal range is not the best for crop. The 18-135 has a great range, and the Nano version with the video focus gizmo is supposed to be the best for video with smooth focus transitions.

inevitablyissie said:

My only concern is, will getting a general zoom make some of my lenses redundant and is it just an unnecessary purchase when I have such a range already?

Apologies for the book! Any advice about these lenses is welcome, just need some help deciding what's best.

Thanks

Click to expand...

Ed Rizk said:

Don't let go of the wide...ness. The 10-22 might solve your problems, better glass and a stop faster, but no IS or STM for video. The focus transitions will be like your other USM lenses.

Click to expand...

Ed Rizk said:

Follow your dreams. The 100-400 is actually all it's cracked up to be.

Click to expand...

Ed Rizk said:

Those are great FF lenses. The focal range is not the best for crop. The 18-135 has a great range, and the Nano version with the video focus gizmo is supposed to be the best for video with smooth focus transitions.

Click to expand...

Thank you Ed. Some really helpful stuff! And 'follow your dreams' was the inspiration I didn't know I needed today :-D

inevitablyissie said:

Hello!

I'm looking for some advice to help figure out my lens collection. I'm reconsidering which to keep in my collection and whether they should be upgraded/replaced.

A little bit o' context about my kit:

- 10-18mm: primarily for astrophotography and landscapes but recently I've found the sharpness disappointing for video. I can't decide if I want to let go of the wide...ness

Click to expand...

If the sharpness is ok for photos, it sure should be ok for video. Consider sharpening video to taste in PP?

inevitablyissie said:

- 24mm: absolutely love it and I hope to primarily use it for filmmaking

- 50mm: The one lens I'm never letting go of ;-) When I have the budget I will absolutely consider the f1.4 version instead though (what a gem)

Click to expand...

The EF 50mm f1.4 USM is no gem....

inevitablyissie said:

- 55-250mm: it's always blown me away but I've been thinking it's time to transition to a 70-200 or my dream 100-400 to increase the quality of my pictures and start the transition to full frame (starting to consider this).

Click to expand...

In my opinion only two (3) real reasons to go FF:

1. If you want the possibility of less DOF than APS-C is able to provide
2. If there is a certain special lens with a FOV that you can only get on FF
3. And the one less to do with FF-ness: if you feel the need for higher resolution and only FF provides that at that time

inevitablyissie said:

For the last year or so I've been feeling like I'm missing a general zoom but I've never been able to decide whether it's worth it. I have different purposes for my lenses but I've been told by many fellow photographers that having so many lenses isn't the way to go, especially as I shoot in professional scenarios (another reason for upgrading). My current considerations for general zooms are the 16-35 or the 24-70, both I know are exceptional lenses.

My only concern is, will getting a general zoom make some of my lenses redundant and is it just an unnecessary purchase when I have such a range already?

Apologies for the book! Any advice about these lenses is welcome, just need some help deciding what's best.

Thanks

--
issierose.weebly.com

Click to expand...

brightcolours said:

If the sharpness is ok for photos, it sure should be ok for video. Consider sharpening video to taste in PP?

Click to expand...

Due to the 1080p resolution, I rarely apply sharpening if any at all, simply because it just doesn't look nice to me. I agree PP is good for fixing these kinds of things though.

brightcolours said:

The EF 50mm f1.4 USM is no gem....

Click to expand...

Oh no when I borrowed a copy for the first time I never wanted to let go.

brightcolours said:

brightcolours said:

In my opinion only two (3) real reasons to go FF:

Click to expand...

1. If you want the possibility of less DOF than APS-C is able to provide
2. If there is a certain special lens with a FOV that you can only get on FF
3. And the one less to do with FF-ness: if you feel the need for higher resolution and only FF provides that at that time

Click to expand...

Thanks for the tips. I'm really only considering FF in the future as I'm sure I'll reach a point, probably due to my career, where I'll want that FF crispness ;-)

inevitablyissie said:

brightcolours said:

If the sharpness is ok for photos, it sure should be ok for video. Consider sharpening video to taste in PP?

Click to expand...

Due to the 1080p resolution, I rarely apply sharpening if any at all, simply because it just doesn't look nice to me. I agree PP is good for fixing these kinds of things though.

inevitablyissie said:

The EF 50mm f1.4 USM is no gem....

Click to expand...

Oh no when I borrowed a copy for the first time I never wanted to let go.

Click to expand...

It is not an awful lens, but it is not great wide open, its bokeh is not the smoothest and it is rather easy to damage the motor drive. Its redeeming points: small and light compared to "modern" 50mm f1.4 lenses, and rather inexpensive,

inevitablyissie said:

inevitablyissie said:

inevitablyissie said:

In my opinion only two (3) real reasons to go FF:

Click to expand...

1. If you want the possibility of less DOF than APS-C is able to provide
2. If there is a certain special lens with a FOV that you can only get on FF
3. And the one less to do with FF-ness: if you feel the need for higher resolution and only FF provides that at that time

Click to expand...

Thanks for the tips. I'm really only considering FF in the future as I'm sure I'll reach a point, probably due to my career, where I'll want that FF crispness ;-)

Click to expand...

brightcolours said:

inevitablyissie said:

Hello!

I'm looking for some advice to help figure out my lens collection. I'm reconsidering which to keep in my collection and whether they should be upgraded/replaced.

A little bit o' context about my kit:

- 10-18mm: primarily for astrophotography and landscapes but recently I've found the sharpness disappointing for video. I can't decide if I want to let go of the wide...ness

Click to expand...

If the sharpness is ok for photos, it sure should be ok for video. Consider sharpening video to taste in PP?

Click to expand...

I concur with this. Somehow it doesn't make sense, video is less demanding. Maybe it's not the lens, but some other issue

Hi all,

I am currently so so close to grabbing a 16-35mm f4 IS L lens but I'm stuck. I think it would be a great all-purpose lens but I have some concerns before purchasing.

One of my concerns is, will it simply replace my 24mm? My primary use for the 24mm is filmmaking and I love using the 24mm for general purpose, but as it's a prime I get stuck when I need the ability to zoom.

Another concern is I would exchange my 10-18 for the 16-35 but on a crop sensor the 16-35 isn't as wide and I would, therefore, be losing that creative aspect in my photography.

The prospect of going FF is in my future but not yet and I wouldn't want to invest in this lens if it's not worth using on a crop sensor. I looked into the wider 11-24 and while it's another great lens, there's less focal range to work with and it's not really general purpose.

I've researched a lot of APS-C alternatives and while there are many highly rated lenses (FF 3rd parties included), I'd really like to finally invest in L glass (a dream of mine for many years) and I'd like to start opening my lens collection up to the possibilities of FF too.

I have a 5D mk2, and a 7D Mk2. The 100-400 is great on the 7D when I want greater reach, as well as 16-35 f4, which is great on the 5D when I want wide angle, and the 7D for a carry round. Other lens such as a 100 f 2.4 macro, 50mm f4, and 70-200mm are good on either camera depending on the situation.

KenMT said:

I have a 5D mk2, and a 7D Mk2. The 100-400 is great on the 7D when I want greater reach, as well as 16-35 f4, which is great on the 5D when I want wide angle, and the 7D for a carry round. Other lens such as a 100 f 2.4 macro, 50mm f4, and 70-200mm are good on either camera depending on the situation.

Click to expand...

Super, thank you. I'm trying to ensure a 16-35 is worth having on a crop sensor or whether I just need to wait it out until I make the transition to FF.

inevitablyissie said:

'm trying to ensure a 16-35 is worth having on a crop sensor or whether I just need to wait it out until I make the transition to FF.

Click to expand...

I have an 80d, and 6d2. the 16-35 works wonders for me on both. I do a lot of video professionally, and photography as hobby.

Crop: great walk around lens, wider than the 18 in most zooms, and the 35 is just long enough I feel for a lot of situations. I use it mostly for Video but takes great photos in a nice focal range at it's 1.6 equivalent.

FF: Just beautiful for landscapes. I use it to vlog on FF and to get a nice wide shot while I'm using 80d with the 18-135, or 70-200 for close ups. (2 camera shoot)

BUT

Your current 24mm is going to give you a smaller, faster kit on crop for video and the 16-35 might not give you much advantage. Sure, on the wide end, but f/4 is not as fast for indoor video, and you can zoom with your feet to get the 35 end. Its AF is a little loud compared to STM lenses. I always use external or shotgun audio with it.

I own the 24-70 f/4 L IS and It is just not worth it on a crop if that is where you are staying.

Favorite lens for the $$$ for me is the 35 f/2 IS. not an L but I'm ok with that. Great for video, and useful on both Crop and FF.

Wish they had an 85 or 135 f/2 IS non-L that could help me keep the 70-200 in the bag more often.

All of this is IMHO.

BrunoLandMedia said:

I have an 80d, and 6d2. the 16-35 works wonders for me on both. I do a lot of video professionally, and photography as hobby.

Crop: great walk around lens, wider than the 18 in most zooms, and the 35 is just long enough I feel for a lot of situations. I use it mostly for Video but takes great photos in a nice focal range at it's 1.6 equivalent.

Click to expand...

Awesome, I'm really glad to hear it works well on crop. I also work in photography and videography so it is great knowing how well it works for both.

BrunoLandMedia said:

Your current 24mm is going to give you a smaller, faster kit on crop for video and the 16-35 might not give you much advantage. Sure, on the wide end, but f/4 is not as fast for indoor video, and you can zoom with your feet to get the 35 end. Its AF is a little loud compared to STM lenses. I always use external or shotgun audio with it.

Click to expand...

This is my main dilemma. It's great having something so portable yet sharp. I recently used it for a video job and it performed very well but I was finding myself grasping for more reach particularly as I couldn't physically reposition myself. Perhaps it will be a matter of seeing if one outweighs my purposes more than the other.

Understandably I realise APS-C lenses are optimised for APS-C bodies and FF lenses are optimised for FF bodies. I've heard from many others that on a crop body it's more effective and worthwhile buying something like the 17-55mm. However, with the prospects of FF in my future, I'm reluctant to buy more APS-C lenses knowing I'll be selling them eventually.

BrunoLandMedia said:

All of this is IMHO.

Click to expand...

Thank you, your opinion is much appreciated