Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras
Thread started 29 Apr 2014 (Tuesday) 19:32
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Did I buy the right lens?

 
EricJrSax
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
EricJrSax's Avatar
Joined Sep 2013
Baltimore
Apr 29, 2014 22:23 |  #16

InfiniteDivide wrote in post #16871241external link
I third the vote for the Canon 10-22mm It is the best wide angle lens on crop.
It has great colors and contract. I still miss that lens sometimes.

We got one of those, but I've never put it on my camera before. If I'm not walkin' around my own 135, I always pick up the school's 50. Thanks for that tip, it will get mounted Thursday when we meet. That's cool too, 'cause tracking says my 105 will be here Friday, so I won't be all drunk on the smell of a new lens!




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
EricJrSax
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
EricJrSax's Avatar
Joined Sep 2013
Baltimore
Apr 29, 2014 22:27 |  #17

Sirrith wrote in post #16871226external link
Do you use the 18mm end a lot on your 18-135? If yes, you're going to be missing out on that with the 24-105.

Yes,... way more than I use the 135 end. But I do use it and wish I had more. That's when I start thinking if it's best to switch or walk! But everybody gotta think about that,... just a matter of when and how often I guess! I dunno!




LOG IN TO REPLY
EricJrSax
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
EricJrSax's Avatar
Joined Sep 2013
Baltimore
Apr 29, 2014 22:50 |  #18

tjbrock42 wrote in post #16871308external link
As others have said, there is no difference between EF and EF-S lenses for you. The 18-135mm compares to 24-105mm just as they appear. The 105mm on the EF lens has less reach than the 135mm on the EF-S lens.

Yeah tjbrock42,... just found that out today. Don't where I actually got it from, but I've been thinking that my EF-S lens didn't get the 1.6 treatment because it was an EF-S and my reach was true to the white numbers written on the barrel. But those same very numbers on the barrel of the 105 (reach) would get the 1.6 treatment because of the it being an EF. Wrong! I got it now!

tjbrock42 wrote in post #16871308external link
The only difference is that the 24-105 can be used on a Full Frame camera (5D, 6D, etc.) while The 18-135mm lens cannot be used on the full frame cameras.

tjbrock42 wrote in post #16871308external link
It is hard to say if you made the right decision without knowing what focal length you like or usually shoot, what prompted you to upgrade, what limitations you had with the 18-135mm lens, etc.. If it was me, I would keep the 24-105 and sell the 18-135. You would be still be set from 24-300 and chances are you won't use the 18-135 much after getting the 24-105.

I think I usually shoot around the 80-100 range. At least that what I can remember most of them saying when I pull them up on the computer. I mainly upgraded because I originally thought I be getting the utility of a 168mm lens with way better IQ and light. And while I understand the whole STM thing, stills are still what I like more than video, although I do some video, but not much. I talked about the upgrade of the 70-300. Light is a real pain in when I use it most. The only time it was a real pleasure to use indoors when the one time I shot a basketball game and that turned out pretty good. But there was a lot of light in our gymnasium. It wasn't just centered over the court like when we all went to shot the Wizard's game last year,... dark except directly over the court. Yeah,... I'm thinking that too! I'll learn to shoot with the missing 18mm, and prolly won't miss it after a while. That kinda happened to me when I switched from using only the school's camera before I got my 70D. Had to get used to a slightly different subject approach.

tjbrock42 wrote in post #16871308external link
If you find yourself missing the 18-24mm range that you lose, or if you want to go even wider, I agree with the others who have suggested giving the 10-22mm lens a try. The Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 and Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 are a couple others I would consider for filling this gap.

If instead you decide to return the 24-105 and just want to upgrade the 18-135 with something else... I would consider the Canon 17-55 or 15-85.

Hope this helps!

Yes,... helped a lot! I'm thinking I'll try some of the primes at school this Thursday. But I think the 105 will stay after reading some of these replies!

Gonna answer the rest of you guys tomorrow, but I gotta go to bed right now. Didn't realize it was this late.




LOG IN TO REPLY
EricJrSax
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
EricJrSax's Avatar
Joined Sep 2013
Baltimore
Apr 29, 2014 22:57 |  #19

MalVeauX wrote in post #16871348external link
Heya,

A good prime is a good prime. The 50 F1.8 is a great little prime for it's cost.

Step it up a notch to the Sigma 50 F1.4 and you have a real winner.

But, if you're adventurous, look to some old manual prime lenses! You can get amazingly sharp and nice manual primes on a dime. Super Takumar 50mm F1.4, Helios 44-2 58mm F2, etc, with M42 (Pentax) mounts. I adore the Helios 44-2 lens (58mm F2).

Once you taste thin depth of field from wide aperture, you'll probably not want to use the F4 aperture ever again outside of landscape, architecture, or group photos, etc. Isolation of subject via tight depth of field control is just... it's what the dreamy photos are made of.

Very best,

Hahaha! You sound just like our Advisor! He's always talking about manual focus and then DOF,... and the whole thing about subject isolation. I get that too!




LOG IN TO REPLY
InfiniteDivide
"I wish to be spared"
InfiniteDivide's Avatar
Joined Dec 2013
Kawasaki, Japan
Apr 29, 2014 23:12 |  #20

While the 24-105mm lens is a good all around lens. It teaches you what you like to shoot, wide or long.
It is not a fast lens, and does not have as thin of a DOF and other lenses. This is also a trade off in low light situations.
It is a good lens but does not excel in any areas either.
Personally I don't think it will teach you anything more about 'your' style of photography more than your STM lens will.
I am sure you will enjoy using it though. Have fun.


James Patrus
6D | 16-35L F4 | 24L II | 50L | 100L | |  -> Website (external link) & Gallery (external link)
For Sale:Canon 16-35mm f4 IS l Do you enjoy Super Famicom games? (external link) PM me directly.

LOG IN TO REPLY
skilsaw
Senior Member
302 posts
Joined Aug 2013
Apr 30, 2014 01:41 |  #21

I buy all EF lenses because I hope one day to "graduate" to a full frame camera.
Your crop sensor camera can use both EF and EF-S lenses no problem.
If you change cameras, you can always sell lenses you no longer need.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sega62
Senior Member
sega62's Avatar
755 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Apr 30, 2014 01:57 as a reply to skilsaw's post |  #22

Yes you did, like some say get a super wide angle by selling your 18-135.
But i am suprised no one mentioned the Tokina 11-16 II cause its a greaaaaat lens.
F2.8 with IS.....for $550

Also the 70-200 f4 IS. Is a great lens, not too expensive, depends what you shoot....
Also, maybe one day you will get a full frame, all the above lenses will fit it.

Have fun shooting, oh yeah by the way I really like the 50 1.4 on my 6D....its my only prime, its lite, and does a nice bokeh for the price.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Joined Nov 2010
Hong Kong
Apr 30, 2014 03:13 |  #23

EricJrSax wrote in post #16871421external link
Yes,... way more than I use the 135 end. But I do use it and wish I had more. That's when I start thinking if it's best to switch or walk! But everybody gotta think about that,... just a matter of when and how often I guess! I dunno!

Can you return the 24-105?

Because if you like shooting wide a lot, then you'll find yourself switching lenses constantly if you keep the 24-105. I suggest you get rid of the 24-105 (either return it or sell it), and buy yourself a 15-85 to replace the 18-135, and add a 70-200 f4 or a Tamron 70-300 VC USD, or keep the 18-135 and do the same. You could also add the 10-22.

Why do I not recommend the 10-22 + 24-105 + 70-xxx? Because if you want to shoot something wide, and you have your main lens (which is generally the 24-105/15-85/18-135) on the camera, and if that main lens is the 24-105, you will have to stop, change lenses, shoot, then change back, because 24mm on crop is not wide at all. If that main lens is your 15-85 or 18-135, you can simply zoom out because both those lenses actually give you a wide angle. It also means you can carry just 1 lens around with you most of the time, or 2 lenses if you want more reach. With the 24-105 you would have to carry a wider lens AND a longer lens around with you.


-Tom
Flickr
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

LOG IN TO REPLY
apersson850
Cream of the Crop
apersson850's Avatar
11,662 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Traryd, Sweden
Apr 30, 2014 04:30 as a reply to Sirrith's post |  #24

Changing lenses is the whole point of SLR cameras. Carrying them is what pockets and bags are for.


Anders

LOG IN TO REPLY
Lbsimon
...never exercised in my life
Lbsimon's Avatar
Joined Jan 2011
Boston, MA
Apr 30, 2014 07:19 |  #25

apersson850 wrote in post #16871759external link
Changing lenses is the whole point of SLR cameras. Carrying them is what pockets and bags are for.

The whole point if an SLR is to let you use the right lenses for the job. If you have to constantly change the lenses to do that job - you chose wrong lenses.


5D Mark IV | 6D | S110
EF 17-40L | EF 24-105L (two) | EF 70-200L F4 IS | EF 100-400L II | EF 85 1.8 | EF 50 1.8 STM | Canon 1.4x III | Canon 1.4x II
Yongnuo 685 | Nissin Di622 M2 | Nissin Di422

LOG IN TO REPLY
advaitin
Goldmember
advaitin's Avatar
Joined Jun 2003
The Fun Coast of Florida
Apr 30, 2014 07:50 |  #26

No one is mentioning the sole reason I have an 18-135 STM lens--the video focusing interface. If you do video on the 4Ti, 5Ti and 70D , the 18-135 provides stepless auto focus. Otherwise there are better lens to cover the same field of view or nearly. The excellent 15-85mm EFS, for instance.


Canons to the left, Canons to the right,
We hold our L glass toward the light,
Digitizing in a snap reflective glory
That will forever tell our imaged story.

LOG IN TO REPLY
EricJrSax
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
EricJrSax's Avatar
Joined Sep 2013
Baltimore
Apr 30, 2014 08:38 |  #27

Lbsimon wrote in post #16871952external link
The whole point if an SLR is to let you use the right lenses for the job. If you have to constantly change the lenses to do that job - you chose wrong lenses.

Yeah,... we talk a lot about that in school during our 'switch or walk' discussions! It can be a fine line or it can be a broad line, but a line you gotta think about when buying lenses! And it's more than about reach,... it's also about task, environment and VOF. Now I think I'm gonna say this right,... If you're shooting outdoor sports, the whole bokeh thing ain't that important. Well,... DOF is always important and something you gotta think about and managing, but the whole 'quality of bokeh balls' thing ain't, not like if you're shooting portraits with backgrounds. So you can give up on some aperture and gain some range when choosing your lense, and prolly save some money. Gaining range always cuts down on the switching part and the walk becomes more about perspective than reach. And from what I've learn so far, walking for perspective is ok, but walking for reach can be a disadvantage and usually mean the lens may not up to the task. Did I get that about right?




LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
MalVeauX's Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
Florida
Apr 30, 2014 09:18 |  #28

EricJrSax wrote in post #16872114external link
Yeah,... we talk a lot about that in school during our 'switch or walk' discussions! It can be a fine line or it can be a broad line, but a line you gotta think about when buying lenses! And it's more than about reach,... it's also about task, environment and VOF. Now I think I'm gonna say this right,... If you're shooting outdoor sports, the whole bokeh thing ain't that important. Well,... DOF is always important and something you gotta think about and managing, but the whole 'quality of bokeh balls' thing ain't, not like if you're shooting portraits with backgrounds. So you can give up on some aperture and gain some range when choosing your lense, and prolly save some money. Gaining range always cuts down on the switching part and the walk becomes more about perspective than reach. And from what I've learn so far, walking for perspective is ok, but walking for reach can be a disadvantage and usually mean the lens may not up to the task. Did I get that about right?

Heya,

When shooting sports, it's more important to be able to freeze the action, or at least the action you want to freeze (sometimes a little limb blur is great). So wide aperture is more useful for that. Bokeh, is going to happen on a telephoto of 200~400mm in length, even at F8. You don't have to worry about getting some blur for isolation of subject, it'll be there when using telephoto without you even trying.

In this case, you choose the focal length (lens) based on physical constraints. Sports outdoors for example you can't just go on the field with them. So you need long focal length. The nice thing about blur is that again, longer focal length even at F8 will blur, and on top of that, there's more compression of background that is distance when using telephoto compared to short focal lengths. So combined, you still get blurry backgrounds.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
mwsilver
Goldmember
Joined Oct 2011
Central New Jersey
Apr 30, 2014 12:28 |  #29

EricJrSax wrote in post #16871036external link
Hi,... need a little hind-sight advice. I got a 70D last August bundled with the 18-135 STM and 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM lenses. Great outfit,... been poppin' shutter from day one. Yesterday I ordered my first new lens,... the 24-105 f/4 L IS USM. Now I'm kinda sick that maybe I did the wrong thing and stupidly overlapped my focal lengths for not enough reason. I'm thinking maybe I should have done something different,... like a 50. This Christmas I plan on selling the 70-300 and maybe the 18-135, not sure about tho, and replacing them with what I just ordered and one of the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L's. But my confusion over the whole EF vs EF-S thing is giving me the creeps and I'm not sure I'm doing the right thing. Will I, or will I not get more reach!?!? I thought getting the 24-105 was smart since I use the 18-135 most,... but not so sure anymore.

What would you guys have done? Or did I do the right thing! The new lens hasn't arrived yet, so I guess I can turn it around once it gets here,... I guess! Wish I would'a posted this BEFORE pounding on the 'Confirm' button!

The only downside of the 24 -105 mm on a crop body like the 70D is that 24 mm is not very wide. If you want to take expansive landscapes or wide angle indoors shots you'll need a lens capable of at least 18mm. You might find you will need to add a lens like the Canon 10-22 at a later date. The other thing to be aware of is that f/4, while faster than your existing lenses, is still fairly slow (narrow aperture) for low light shooting. As a general rule, for low light you would want a lens with at least an f/2.8 aperture.


Mark
Canon 7D II, 60D, T3i, T2i, Sigma 18-35 f/1.8, and 30 f/1.4. Canon EF 70-200 L f/4 IS, EF 35 f/2 IS, EFs 10-18 STM, EFs 15-85, EFs 18-200, EF 50 f/1.8 STM. Tamron 18-270 PZD, B+W MRC CPL, Canon 320EX, Vanguard Alta Pro 254CT & SBH 250 head. RODE Stereo Videomic Pro, Lightroom 6, Elements 15

LOG IN TO REPLY
tjbrock42
Senior Member
944 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Indiana
Apr 30, 2014 16:25 |  #30

sega62 wrote in post #16871664external link
But i am suprised no one mentioned the Tokina 11-16 II cause its a greaaaaat lens.
F2.8 with IS.....for $550

I did... Although, I didn't think it had IS.


6D
24-105L, 50 STM, 135L, 430EX II
For Sale: 40D

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

2,819 views & 0 likes for this thread
Did I buy the right lens?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00268 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.05s
Latest registered member is Floorguy
947 guests, 511 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017