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 12 Mar 2014 (Wednesday) 04:24
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

My proposed FF lens line up. Please critique

 
Kirth ­ Gersen
Member
Avatar
220 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 11
Joined Jul 2013
Location: Kent, UK
     
Mar 12, 2014 04:24 |  #1

I have another line of enquiry on another forum which is trying to decide whether to go FF or not, and if so whether it is the Nikon D800 or the 5D mk3 or the 6D. I still haven't decided - I sway between each camera on a daily basis!

However, if I stick with Canon and do go FF, here is my proposed line lens up and the reasons why.

  • Budget is reasonably secondary, though I tend to be a 2nd tier type of guy in terms of bang per buck.
  • Weight is important to me, I don't want to lug huge long, heavy lenses about on holiday. So 70-200 f2.8 zooms and 300+ telephotos are out.
  • What really floats my boat is portraiture and people shots. And what really, really floats my boat is shallow DOF, great bokeh and tack sharp subjects which pop in an almost 3D way.

My Flickr favourites  (external link)gallery sort of shows these preferences.

So to the lenses:

  • 24-105 f4. Walkaround lens. Reasonably light, great value for money when sold as a kit lens. Good focal range. Perfect for holidays.
  • 85 f1.8. Already have this lens. Should be a great indoor portrait lens. Will probably upgrade to a Sigma 1.4 or a Canon 1.2L in the future.
  • 200 f2.8. Tough call between this and the 70-200 f4. I don't do a lot of long telephoto stuff, nor sports stuff but it comes in handy occasionally. But what swings it is that I ran Exposure Plot (external link) on the 2014 keepers on my hard drive and for those in the 55-250 range, a significant majority were at 250 - indicating that I needed max zoom and probably more. In addition, I think the 200 would make for an excellent discreet portrait lens for outdoors, with better DOF/Bokeh than the f4 zoom at 200. Also the increased compression will give more creative portrait options in addition to the 85mm.


That's it. I have decided I don't do enough UWA to justify a specific lens. I may in future add a 35mm 1.4 for group portraits indoors.

What do you reckon?

Canon 6D: Canon 85mm f/1.8 ~ Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 ~ 70-300mm f/4.0 - f/5.6 ~ Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 ~ Carl Zeiss 100mm f/2.0
Fuji X100F
Leica M6: Leica Sumicron 35mm ~ Leica Sumicron 75mm
Pentax 67: Pentax 105mm f/2.4 ~ Pentax 55mm f/4.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
thamer
Member
Avatar
115 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2008
     
Mar 12, 2014 06:08 |  #2

i am planing to do the same as you when i upgrade to full- frame body in the near future but the canon 200 f2.8 will be very limited of use because it is fixed long telephoto but the canon 70-200 f4 will be more fixable and more use and i think the f4 will be great if you don't use it in sport or in low light



My Flickr (external link)
500PX (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FerozeK
Senior Member
Avatar
250 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Apr 2012
Location: JHB, South Africa
     
Mar 12, 2014 06:36 |  #3

I prefer the 24-70 and 70-200 F4 combo which is what I did combined with a 5d. I would suggest adding a flash in there if you going with the F4's. I actually prefer a 50mm for 2-4 people group shots




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,086 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2773
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Mar 12, 2014 06:41 |  #4

I may end up selling both my zooms. Haven't used them in awhile.

I vote for 200mm 2.8 II. It's size and cost is unbeatable.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NemethR
Senior Member
Avatar
864 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 211
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Pécs, Hungary
     
Mar 12, 2014 06:42 |  #5

Kirth Gersen wrote in post #16752505 (external link)
  • 24-105 f4. Walkaround lens. Reasonably light, great value for money when sold as a kit lens. Good focal range. Perfect for holidays.
  • 85 f1.8. Already have this lens. Should be a great indoor portrait lens. Will probably upgrade to a Sigma 1.4 or a Canon 1.2L in the future.
  • 200 f2.8. Tough call between this and the 70-200 f4. I don't do a lot of long telephoto stuff, nor sports stuff but it comes in handy occasionally. But what swings it is that I ran Exposure Plot (external link) on the 2014 keepers on my hard drive and for those in the 55-250 range, a significant majority were at 250 - indicating that I needed max zoom and probably more. In addition, I think the 200 would make for an excellent discreet portrait lens for outdoors, with better DOF/Bokeh than the f4 zoom at 200. Also the increased compression will give more creative portrait options in addition to the 85mm.

24-105: Great lens, I used it a lot on a Crop, as for a FF, now I have a 24-70 f/2.8 (Mk1). I do think both are great lenses for the FF cameras, the 24-70 is slightly better in low light, and for portraits at the 70mm end (in my opinion).
The 24-105 has IS, wich is on the other hand better for still subjects.
Its a tough call, I choose the 24-70, because the f/2.8, no regrets.
I am sure you wont regret the 24-105 either.

85mm 1.8: One of the best lenses you can get for under $500, its great for portraits, essentially it will equal a field of view of the 50mm lens on a crop.

200mm 2.8: Well, this is a tough one.
I personally would NOT really suggest this lens, as it is very limited in versatility.
If you plan to shoot portraits, I think you might be better off with a 135L.
If you need maximum zoom, then maybe a 70-300 would be better.
Or the 70-200 f/4 IS for versatility, that lens is absolutely superb.
Great sharpness, very usefull IS, and beutifull bokeh. The only downside is that its "only" f/4, but tbh. @200mm f2.8 is so shallow, that you will most likely not use it anyway too often.


Roland | Hobbyst Photographer
Nikon D850 | Nikon 70-200 f/2.8G VR II | Nikon 85mm f/1.8G | Nikon 35mm f/1.8G

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kirth ­ Gersen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
220 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 11
Joined Jul 2013
Location: Kent, UK
     
Mar 12, 2014 07:17 |  #6

FerozeK wrote in post #16752612 (external link)
I prefer the 24-70 and 70-200 F4 combo which is what I did combined with a 5d. I would suggest adding a flash in there if you going with the F4's. I actually prefer a 50mm for 2-4 people group shots

Another output from exposure plot was that the most shots were taken at 55mm by quite some margin. This was presumably with my 17-55, which hints that I was looking for more reach. I like to minimise my lens changing when out and about, and so feel the extra reach of the 105 (c65mm crop equivalent) would suit better than the 70 (c44mm crop equivalent).

Yep - got flashes.


Canon 6D: Canon 85mm f/1.8 ~ Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 ~ 70-300mm f/4.0 - f/5.6 ~ Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 ~ Carl Zeiss 100mm f/2.0
Fuji X100F
Leica M6: Leica Sumicron 35mm ~ Leica Sumicron 75mm
Pentax 67: Pentax 105mm f/2.4 ~ Pentax 55mm f/4.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kirth ­ Gersen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
220 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 11
Joined Jul 2013
Location: Kent, UK
     
Mar 12, 2014 07:32 |  #7

NemethR wrote in post #16752618 (external link)
200mm 2.8: Well, this is a tough one.
I personally would NOT really suggest this lens, as it is very limited in versatility.
If you plan to shoot portraits, I think you might be better off with a 135L.
If you need maximum zoom, then maybe a 70-300 would be better.
Or the 70-200 f/4 IS for versatility, that lens is absolutely superb.
Great sharpness, very usefull IS, and beutifull bokeh. The only downside is that its "only" f/4, but tbh. @200mm f2.8 is so shallow, that you will most likely not use it anyway too often.

Yeah - tough call. Tempted by the 135L, but if I get that, then I would need the 70-200 zoom for the long stuff, and I want to keep the lens count down where possible.

The 70-300 is a bit too heavy, and I would rather add an extender if I feel 200 is too short.

As for f2.8 being too shallow DOF. Well it will be challenging, but I want to strive for images like this (done on a 5D Mk2).

IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3750/9968756864_e67930db86_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/tobias_wien/9​968756864/  (external link)

Canon 6D: Canon 85mm f/1.8 ~ Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 ~ 70-300mm f/4.0 - f/5.6 ~ Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 ~ Carl Zeiss 100mm f/2.0
Fuji X100F
Leica M6: Leica Sumicron 35mm ~ Leica Sumicron 75mm
Pentax 67: Pentax 105mm f/2.4 ~ Pentax 55mm f/4.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kirth ­ Gersen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
220 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 11
Joined Jul 2013
Location: Kent, UK
     
Mar 12, 2014 07:38 |  #8

Kirth Gersen wrote in post #16752666 (external link)
Tempted by the 135L, but if I get that, then I would need the 70-200 zoom for the long stuff, and I want to keep the lens count down where possible.

That said, the above solution would reduce the compromise factor and "only" add £600 to the overall cost...


Canon 6D: Canon 85mm f/1.8 ~ Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 ~ 70-300mm f/4.0 - f/5.6 ~ Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 ~ Carl Zeiss 100mm f/2.0
Fuji X100F
Leica M6: Leica Sumicron 35mm ~ Leica Sumicron 75mm
Pentax 67: Pentax 105mm f/2.4 ~ Pentax 55mm f/4.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,165 posts
Gallery: 65 photos
Likes: 250
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Mar 12, 2014 07:38 |  #9

I find the 24-105L to be a very versatile lens on full frame. It's my most used lens whenever we travel.

Since moving from crop to full frame, I rarely use my 85mm f/1.8, and I am actually considering selling it. The 135L has replaced it's function since I moved to full frame.

The 200 f/2.8 prime would be a little long for me. I prefer the 135L, and for those rare occasions I need something longer and fast, this lens takes a 1.4x TC very well, getting me to almost 200mm.

Lots of people like the 35mm focal length for people shots, but I prefer 50mm and have a 50L. I also have a 40mm f/2.8 pancake -- it's not as fast as my other primes, but its size and low cost make it a terrific travel prime to go along with my slower zoom lenses that I travel with.


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kirth ­ Gersen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
220 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 11
Joined Jul 2013
Location: Kent, UK
     
Mar 12, 2014 07:49 |  #10

Scott M wrote in post #16752678 (external link)
Since moving from crop to full frame, I rarely use my 85mm f/1.8, and I am actually considering selling it. The 135L has replaced it's function since I moved to full frame.

The 200 f/2.8 prime would be a little long for me. I prefer the 135L, and for those rare occasions I need something longer and fast, this lens takes a 1.4x TC very well, getting me to almost 200mm.

I've just checked out the 135L libraries on pixel peeper and am suitably wowed. Another alternative is to add a 1.4x to the mix and not bother with the 70-200 until come the day I really do feel I need the versatility.

Scott M wrote in post #16752678 (external link)
Lots of people like the 35mm focal length for people shots, but I prefer 50mm and have a 50L. I also have a 40mm f/2.8 pancake -- it's not as fast as my other primes, but its size and low cost make it a terrific travel prime to go along with my slower zoom lenses that I travel with.

You may be right. Particularly as the gap between the 85 and the 135 is a bit close. But that would be for round 2 :).


Canon 6D: Canon 85mm f/1.8 ~ Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 ~ 70-300mm f/4.0 - f/5.6 ~ Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 ~ Carl Zeiss 100mm f/2.0
Fuji X100F
Leica M6: Leica Sumicron 35mm ~ Leica Sumicron 75mm
Pentax 67: Pentax 105mm f/2.4 ~ Pentax 55mm f/4.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FerozeK
Senior Member
Avatar
250 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Apr 2012
Location: JHB, South Africa
     
Mar 12, 2014 07:50 |  #11

Kirth Gersen wrote in post #16752648 (external link)
Another output from exposure plot was that the most shots were taken at 55mm by quite some margin. This was presumably with my 17-55, which hints that I was looking for more reach. I like to minimise my lens changing when out and about, and so feel the extra reach of the 105 (c65mm crop equivalent) would suit better than the 70 (c44mm crop equivalent).

Yep - got flashes.

What I did was rented or borrowed my dream lenses for week before I pulled the trigger, that's how I landed up with the 24-70 instead of the 24-105. They both F4, but the macro in the 24-70 was the deciding factor. Focal length differences didn't bother me as I had the 70-200 F4, the IS on this version is superb, and I feel this is the sharper lens of the lot and I spent a lot of time with the F2.8 version but couldn't handle the weight for the whole day shooting a wedding. I also fly sometimes with my gear and they airlines have become increasingly stricter on the weight for carry on as I refuse to send my gear to luggage

Its very hard to decide if a particular lens will work until you've shot it....




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,558 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3725
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Mar 12, 2014 10:17 |  #12

Since your top two requirements are bang for buck and size and weight, I'd forget the FF DSLRs and pick up a Fuji X-T1 with 18-55, 56/1.2 and wait for the 50-140/2.8.

Dof difference at the telephoto end is barely noticeable between FF and crop for the majority of scenarios. The kit will be much smaller and lighter than any DSLR kit and just as capable up to ISO3200 and even 6400 with a bit of PP. The XF lenses seriously define bang-for-buck imo. L quality glass for considerably cheaper.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // XF 60mm f2.4 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // Rokinon 21mm f1.4 // XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 // XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 // Rokinon 85mm f1.4 // Zhonghi Lensturbo ii // Various adapted MF lenses
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gnome ­ chompski
Goldmember
1,252 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 136
Joined Jun 2013
Location: oakland, ca
     
Mar 12, 2014 10:33 |  #13

Unless you are absolutely dedicated to the 200mm focal length., I would add a 70-200 zoom instead of the 200mm prime. The flexibility of the 70-200 is just too convenient.


Tumblr (external link)
Flickr (external link)
Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kenwood33
Goldmember
2,597 posts
Likes: 20
Joined Jul 2005
     
Mar 12, 2014 10:42 |  #14

Based on your requirements I would go for 6d + sigma 35 1.4 + canon 135 2


Gearlist

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Mar 12, 2014 10:54 as a reply to  @ gnome chompski's post |  #15

No problems with your choices, though I'd rather the 70-200L than the 200L even if it is an f/4 (if you are only going to have only those 3 lenses for awhile). I like the versatility of the zoom too much.

I agree that the 135L might be better for some than the 200L. But if you get the 24-105L, it is close enough in FL - so I'd also rather have the 200L. If you were looking at a 24-70mm, then I could see the 135L.

Still, I'd rather have the zoom.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

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

3,363 views & 0 likes for this thread
My proposed FF lens line up. Please critique
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 Tuedel
1691 guests, 201 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.