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 EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 21 Dec 2010 (Tuesday) 01:06
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

so im going FF line up question.

 
Andy ­ R
Goldmember
Andy R's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
So Cal
Dec 21, 2010 01:06 |  #1

So I have a 50D (thats for sale) and ill be picking up a 5DC, now my question is if i should traid out a lens...i just sold my 10-24mm and still have the tamron 28-75 2.8 and the 70-200f4. i will be keeping the 70-200 and picking up a 50mm 1.4 but im wondering if the 28-75 will cut it, i love this thing on the crop but it will get much wider...

so id like something really wide as i love my uwa and pick up something that was more equivalant to my current set up?

opions on what you would get as a nice walk around lens(s) that would cover a nice uwa but get near where the 70-200 pick up at?
oh and i dont have an endless account so pricing should be simalar to the tamron maybe 17-50?, around 500-600$ or so, if i need to get an uwa later that is fine.
thanks in advance
~Andy


5Dii ~ SL1
Rok 14mm ~ 24 STM ~ 24-70L f4 IS ~ 50 f1.8 STM ~ 70-200 f4 IS ~ 1.4xii & 2xii

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
KVN ­ Photo
Goldmember
KVN Photo's Avatar
1,940 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Jakarta, Indonesia
Dec 21, 2010 02:35 |  #2

You may want to consider 17-40, it is very wide on FF, and versatile enough.
Many people are trying one of this combo:

1. FF body + 17-40L +50 + 70-200L
2. FF body + 16-35L or 17-40L + 24-70L + 70-200L

One of those option should serve well in IQ department I think.


X-Pro1 + 18-55 f/2.8-4 OIS + 55-200 f/3.8-4.5 OIS
TS-E 24 f/3.5L II + XF 35 f/1.4 + XF 56 f/1.2
Sony RX100 II + G12
Travel the world!

LOG IN TO REPLY
Breezy900
Senior Member
318 posts
Joined Oct 2010
CA
Dec 21, 2010 05:27 |  #3

I have option 1, and honestly I think its the best setup. You have portraits nailed with the 50, and even the long end of the 17-40, tele for nature wildlife, 17-40 for landscapes 70-200 can also work here.


5D Mark 2 Gripped
17-40L
35L
85 1.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
Andy ­ R
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Andy R's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
So Cal
Dec 21, 2010 10:27 |  #4

cool thanks for the options of what people are doing :)


5Dii ~ SL1
Rok 14mm ~ 24 STM ~ 24-70L f4 IS ~ 50 f1.8 STM ~ 70-200 f4 IS ~ 1.4xii & 2xii

LOG IN TO REPLY
versedmb
Goldmember
4,448 posts
Joined Apr 2006
Dec 21, 2010 12:02 |  #5

KY707 wrote in post #11489407external link
...

1. FF body + 17-40L +50 + 70-200L
....

Nice "starter" FF set up, as long as you don't mind not having a "standard" zoom. I would add the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 - very sharp, inexpensive and light weight lens.


Gear List

Michael

LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
28,921 posts
Joined Dec 2006
Dec 21, 2010 12:05 |  #6

I get a lot of use from my F4 trinity, the 17-40, the 24-105, and the 70-200F4IS. Match that up with a fast prime of your choice for portrait/low light work and you are good to go.




LOG IN TO REPLY
carlXSI
Senior Member
315 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Bay Area, CA
Dec 21, 2010 12:31 |  #7

Check out this thread: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=874708

I agree with gonzogolf that the F4 trinity + 85 1.8 will cover everything for you.


6D | 17-40L | 70-200L | 35 2.0 IS | 430ex II | flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Jeff81
Goldmember
Jeff81's Avatar
1,689 posts
Joined Dec 2008
SoCal
Dec 21, 2010 13:00 |  #8

versedmb wrote in post #11491425external link
Nice "starter" FF set up, as long as you don't mind not having a "standard" zoom. I would add the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 - very sharp, inexpensive and light weight lens.

I'll echo this. I used the tamron 28-75 on my 5D2 and thought it worked great as a standard zoom. I used my primes more, but when I wanted a zoom, it fit the bill.


6D | Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Sigma 50 f/1.4 Art, Canon 85 f/1.8
flickr (external link)
Feedback

LOG IN TO REPLY
reprazent
Goldmember
reprazent's Avatar
1,045 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Dec 21, 2010 13:12 |  #9

I'd stick with what you have right now. 28-75 and 70-200 is all you need for FF. The tamron will make a great walkaround lens.
(it was the first lens that I purchased for my 5D)

You can always get yourself a wider lens later if you want to go ultra wide.


gearlist | flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
picturecrazy
soft-hearted weenie-boy
picturecrazy's Avatar
8,552 posts
Joined Jan 2006
Alberta, CANADA
Dec 21, 2010 13:29 |  #10

Here's a suggestion out of left field. Your lens setup is not ideally suited for crop, which is probably why you want to upgrade. You'd likely get more benefit from getting a great crop lens setup than spending cash on a FF body. A nice 17-50 and a wider prime would really round out your flexibility a lot more than using a FF body with a $600 lens budget.


-Lloyd
The BOUDOIR - Edmonton Intimate Boudoir Photographyexternal link
Night and Day Photography - Edmonton Studio Family Baby Child Maternity Wedding Photographersexternal link
Night and Day Photography - Edmonton Headshot Photographersexternal link
Facebookexternal link | Twitterexternal link |Instagramexternal link | Gear

LOG IN TO REPLY
cueball
Senior Member
cueball's Avatar
468 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Oklahoma
Dec 21, 2010 13:30 |  #11

gonzogolf wrote in post #11491435external link
I get a lot of use from my F4 trinity, the 17-40, the 24-105, and the 70-200F4IS. Match that up with a fast prime of your choice for portrait/low light work and you are good to go.

I shoot crop as well but I've thought about switching to this trinity (selling my 70-200 f2.8L IS and replacing it with the f4 L IS version and 17-40). I can see myself possibly going full frame and this would be a great way to cover a broad range of focal lengths (it would work well on my 40D as well). My current 70-200 was great for when my daughter was figure skating but now that she's doing gymnastics I'm going to have to start getting a few primes to work with.

I'm not sure how good the OP's 28-70 is but I can attest to the 24-105 being a very good lens that gets the job done about 80% of the time for me. Even on FF it might not get as wide as what the OP wants though.


Canon: 5D Mark IV, 16-35 f4L IS, 24-70 f2.8L II, 70-200 f2.8L IS II, 100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS II, 100 f2.8L IS Macro, 2X III, 1.4X III, 580EX II, 430EX | mu43: Olympus OMD EM-1, 17 f1.8, 45 f1.8, 75 f1.8, 12-40 f2.8 PRO, 40-150 f2.8 PRO, MC-14
Feedback: http://photography-on-the.net ...=12723614&postcount​=27889, http://photography-on-the.net ...=13303433&postcount​=30051

LOG IN TO REPLY
Fogflip
Member
Fogflip's Avatar
Joined Sep 2010
Dec 21, 2010 13:35 |  #12

I recently went FF and my combo so far has been 16-35, 24-70, 70-200 is II. I rarely find my self using my 24-70 any more except for indoor events partys etc and some times as a walk around. Hopefully switching it to a 50 mm prime soon.


5d mkII~~30D~~24-70 l series~~70-200 II
My Flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommydigi
Cream of the Crop
Tommydigi's Avatar
Joined May 2010
Chicago
Dec 21, 2010 13:41 as a reply to picturecrazy's post |  #13

I agree with Picturecrazy about having the right lens. Putting a cheap lens on a full frame camera is probably not the best solution but putting a good 17-50 or 15-85 would be more ideal.

That being said I also like the idea of going with F4 zooms and non L primes. I have 2.8 zooms and I too am getting tired of the weight. I added it up and my 24-70/70-200 2.8 combined weight is about 5 pounds where the 24-105/70-200 F4IS is about 3.

- Edit - forgot to mention that the Tamron is a pretty decent lens so if you are set on going full frame shoot for a while and see if you find it lacking. I sorta did, I had the Tamron 28-75 and I switched to the 24-105 then 24-70. I found the difference the Canon focused more accurately, had better colors/contrast ( more accurate ) but the Tamron was not bad and 28 will be pretty wide on full frame.


Website (external link) | Flickr (external link)
Canon 5DII • 7DII • G15 • 24LII • 50L • 100L • 135L • 40 STM • 16-35L F4 IS • 24-70L F4 IS • 100-400L II • 1.4x • 600EX II • 270 EX II

LOG IN TO REPLY
cskorik
Senior Member
845 posts
Joined Aug 2008
Dec 21, 2010 15:25 |  #14

The Sigma 12-24 is the last UWA you'll ever need. My copy (at least) is sharp and accurate, and there's no wider full-frame lens available!


My portfolioexternal link!

LOG IN TO REPLY
Andy ­ R
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Andy R's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
So Cal
Dec 22, 2010 01:33 |  #15

thanks for the advice, ill stick with my 28-75 and see if it will suit my needs, and if it does then just pic up and uwa for it later on. i like the idea of the 17-50 but i think it will be just a tad wide for a good walk around zoom...but i think the higher iso capabilities might allow me to get by with an f4 lens if in not happy with the tamron...thanks again for all your help :)


5Dii ~ SL1
Rok 14mm ~ 24 STM ~ 24-70L f4 IS ~ 50 f1.8 STM ~ 70-200 f4 IS ~ 1.4xii & 2xii

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

3,205 views & 0 likes for this thread
so im going FF line up question.
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


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 0.0013 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.04s
Latest registered member is marypx
918 guests, 422 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017