Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
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 23 Oct 2012 (Tuesday) 17:17
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Opinions on lens options

 
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,414 posts
Gallery: 222 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4588
Joined Dec 2008
     
Oct 23, 2012 17:17 |  #1

With the price dropping on 5DIII's, I plan one getting one in the not too distant future.

I have a 70-200 f/4L, and an EF 28-135. (and a 100 macro)

Should I get the 5DIII body + 24-105L kit, or..

Body only and a 17-40L, and just bridge the gap between that and the 70-200 with the trusty old 28-135?

Types of photography: macro, hummingbirds, family, travel (landscapes), pretty much in that order.

The kit price is tempting, and the 24-105 would make a nice general use lens. Think I'll regret not being able to go wider?


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
hsmoscout
Goldmember
Avatar
1,166 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Camera Addicts Anonymous
     
Oct 23, 2012 17:31 |  #2

Well the 10-22 in your signature would be similar to the 17-40L on FF, so could you do without that wide perspective??


My Gear
˙ʇsod uı ʇı xıɟ

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
THREAD ­ STARTER
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,414 posts
Gallery: 222 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4588
Joined Dec 2008
     
Oct 23, 2012 17:37 |  #3

hsmoscout wrote in post #15160401 (external link)
Well the 10-22 in your signature would be similar to the 17-40L on FF, so could you do without that wide perspective??

I've thought about that, but the wide end of my 28-135 would be equivelant to 17.5 (so, in the middle of my 10-22 on a crop). I wonder if that would be wide enough. Granted, the 28-135 is the least sharp of the lenses in this discussion, but not terrible.


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1Tanker
Goldmember
Avatar
4,470 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Swaying to the Symphony of Destruction
     
Oct 23, 2012 17:40 as a reply to  @ hsmoscout's post |  #4

24mm on ff will be like 15mm on crop. If you find yourself using wider than 15 on your 10-22, you will likely miss it. But, 24 on ff is still pretty wide. If i were you, i would get the 5D III/24-105 kit, and hold onto the 28-135. If you find you miss the wide end, sell the 24-105 and pick up a 17-40.. and let the 28-135 be your walkaround lens. Once you use the 24-105, i have a feeling you won't particularly want to go back to using the 28-135.


Kel
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nightdiver13
Unabashed nerd!
Avatar
2,272 posts
Likes: 38
Joined May 2010
Location: Bigfoot Country
     
Oct 23, 2012 17:42 |  #5

I'd get the kit personally. The 24-105 is a cracking good lens, and perfectly suited to the 5Ds. Only you know if 24mm would be wide enough for your needs though... I'm in the process of selling my 17-40 because 24 is about as wide as I like to go.


Neil

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
THREAD ­ STARTER
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,414 posts
Gallery: 222 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4588
Joined Dec 2008
     
Oct 23, 2012 17:45 |  #6

1Tanker wrote in post #15160428 (external link)
24mm on ff will be like 15mm on crop. If you find yourself using wider than 15 on your 10-22, you will likely miss it. But, 24 on ff is still pretty wide. If i were you, i would get the 5D III/24-105 kit, and hold onto the 28-135. If you find you miss the wide end, sell the 24-105 and pick up a 17-40.. and let the 28-135 be your walkaround lens. Once you use the 24-105, i have a feeling you won't particularly want to go back to using the 28-135.

Thanks. I won't be getting rid of the 28-135, regardless; I'm keeping my 40D and will probably keep it attached to that if I get the 24-105. That'll become my wife's camera ;)

Maybe I should rob a bank. If I get away with it, I can get whatever gear I want; if I get caught, I won't need it anyhow :)


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,263 posts
Likes: 2096
Joined Nov 2005
Location: San Diego County, California, USA
     
Oct 23, 2012 18:17 as a reply to  @ LV Moose's post |  #7

IMO, the photographer's mid-range zoom lens should be the best in his kit. Because most of his/her images may be shot with that lens. I shoot 66% of my 1.6x images with the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 33% with my 70-200mm f/4L IS. I probably shoot less than 1-2% of my imagery with all my other lenses put together.

The 28-135mm may not be the best lens in the Canon inventory. But in some cases it is a close rival to the 24-105mm f/4L IS lens.

Here is a website with a comparison of the 28-135mm and 24-105mm lenses.

http://www.acapixus.dk …raphy/24_to_105​/index.htm (external link)


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drzenitram
Senior Member
824 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Oct 23, 2012 18:21 |  #8

RPCrowe wrote in post #15160565 (external link)
IMO, the photographer's mid-range zoom lens should be the best in his kit. Because most of his/her images may be shot with that lens. I shoot 66% of my 1.6x images with the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 33% with my 70-200mm f/4L IS. I probably shoot less than 1-2% of my imagery with all my other lenses put together.

The 28-135mm may not be the best lens in the Canon inventory. But in some cases it is a close rival to the 24-105mm f/4L IS lens.

Here is a website with a comparison of the 28-135mm and 24-105mm lenses.

http://www.acapixus.dk …raphy/24_to_105​/index.htm (external link)

I think that depends heavily on your style! I use my sig 85 for 70% of my shots, my 35 for 15%, and the last 15% split between everything else.


| Bodies - 5D Mark II, T2i | Lenses - Helios 44-2, Sigma 35mm 1.4, Sigma 85 1.4, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, Tamron SP AF 1.4x TC | Lights - 430ex ii x2, Random 3rd party strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
THREAD ­ STARTER
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,414 posts
Gallery: 222 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4588
Joined Dec 2008
     
Oct 23, 2012 18:23 |  #9

RPCrowe wrote in post #15160565 (external link)
.....
Here is a website with a comparison of the 28-135mm and 24-105mm lenses.

http://www.acapixus.dk …raphy/24_to_105​/index.htm (external link)

Thanks for the link. Not as much difference as I would have expected.


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alazgr8
Member
Avatar
233 posts
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Orange County, CA.
     
Oct 23, 2012 18:25 as a reply to  @ LV Moose's post |  #10

I have a 40D, and I am also planning on getting a 5DIII next year. I have the 17-55 f/2.8but it wont work on a FF body, same with your 10-22. get rid of the 28-135, and 10-22 and get the 24-70 f/2.8L II, and you will have a great lineup. -rick


Rick S.
My Gear = Canon 50d ~ EF 100 f/2.8L IS USM Macro ~ EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS USM ~ EF-S 17-55 IS USM f/2.8 IS ~ EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM ~ EF 28-135 IS f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
THREAD ­ STARTER
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,414 posts
Gallery: 222 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4588
Joined Dec 2008
     
Oct 23, 2012 18:30 |  #11

alazgr8 wrote in post #15160598 (external link)
I have a 40D, and I am also planning on getting a 5DIII next year. I have the 17-55 f/2.8but it wont work on a FF body, same with your 10-22. get rid of the 28-135, and 10-22 and get the 24-70 f/2.8L II, and you will have a great lineup. -rick

As long as I have the 40D (which I'm keeping), I'll never sell the 10-22; Awesome lens. And I'm not quite ready to spend $2,300 on a 24-70, but appreciate the input ;)


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alazgr8
Member
Avatar
233 posts
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Orange County, CA.
     
Oct 23, 2012 23:50 |  #12

That's how I feel about my 17-55. Good luck in your quest to find the perfect lense lineup. That's what we are all searching for. -rick

LV Moose wrote in post #15160613 (external link)
As long as I have the 40D (which I'm keeping), I'll never sell the 10-22; Awesome lens. And I'm not quite ready to spend $2,300 on a 24-70, but appreciate the input ;)


Rick S.
My Gear = Canon 50d ~ EF 100 f/2.8L IS USM Macro ~ EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS USM ~ EF-S 17-55 IS USM f/2.8 IS ~ EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM ~ EF 28-135 IS f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,266 posts
Gallery: 83 photos
Likes: 363
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Oct 24, 2012 10:37 |  #13

LV Moose wrote in post #15160613 (external link)
As long as I have the 40D (which I'm keeping), I'll never sell the 10-22; Awesome lens. And I'm not quite ready to spend $2,300 on a 24-70, but appreciate the input ;)

I was going to suggest keeping the 10-22 since you were hanging onto the 40D. Since that is your plan, I would get the 5D3 with the 24-105L. If you need to recover some money, sell the 28-135 instead.

I also kept my EFS 10-22 instead of exchanging it for a 17-40L after buying a 5D3 + 24-105L in the spring. I do not shoot ultra wide very often, so the 10-22 on my 7D works fine to fill that occasional need. This approach has the added benefit of helping to reduce lens changes if you carry both bodies.


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dave_bass5
Goldmember
Avatar
4,303 posts
Gallery: 34 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 199
Joined Apr 2005
Location: London, centre of the universe
     
Oct 24, 2012 11:05 |  #14

I'd get the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC over the 24-105L as a general purpose lens. Both good lenses but you would get a bit more by having f/2.8 IMO.


Dave.
Gallery@http://www.flickr.com/​photos/davebass5/ (external link)
Canon 5DMKIV | Canon EOS-M50 | Canon 24-70 f/2.8L MKII | 70-300L | 135L f/2.0 | EF-S 10-18 | 40 f/2.8 STM | 35mm f/2 IS | Canon S110 | Fuji F31FD | Canon 580EXII, 270EXII | Yongnuo YN-622C Triggers.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
THREAD ­ STARTER
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,414 posts
Gallery: 222 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4588
Joined Dec 2008
     
Oct 24, 2012 12:21 |  #15

dave_bass5 wrote in post #15163345 (external link)
I'd get the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC over the 24-105L as a general purpose lens. Both good lenses but you would get a bit more by having f/2.8 IMO.

Another option, thank you. And $1,000 cheaper than the Canon 24-70L, but not quite as good optically, although it is stabilized. Always trade-offs.


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

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

1,535 views & 0 likes for this thread
Opinions on lens options
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is henry65
894 guests, 249 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.