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 06 Jul 2016 (Wednesday) 21:32
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Lens upgrade recommendation needed

 
ebiggs
Senior Member
Avatar
638 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Spring Hill, KS
     
Jul 08, 2016 10:03 |  #31

mannetti21 wrote in post #18059999 (external link)
Just off the top of my head, I can think of a handful of L lenses that are not weather sealed and build quality is somewhat of a subjective matter.


I am sure you can, so can I. All 'L' lenses are not the same just as all ef-s lenses are not the same.

mannetti21 wrote in post #18059999 (external link)
I can also think of a few L lenses that have plastic bodies.


Yes, they do. I have some. Still the build on an 'L' plastic body is better than a ef-s. It is obvious to most people.

mannetti21 wrote in post #18059999 (external link)
in that sense, he essentially has an "L quality" lens already.

No, he doesn't. A lens is made up of all its specs not simply one. I have an 'L' lens except .............!
In his case the OP may be considering just IQ as the main most important spec but in total he does not have an 'L' lens.

People that pooh-pooh 'L' lenses are just kidding themselves.


G1x, EOS 1Dx, EOS 1D Mk IV, ef 8-15mm f4L,
ef 16-35mm f2.8L II, ef 24-70mm f2.8L II, ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II,
Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport
*** PS 6, ACR 9.3, Lightroom 6.5 ***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ebiggs
Senior Member
Avatar
638 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Spring Hill, KS
     
Jul 08, 2016 10:11 |  #32

Archibald wrote in post #18061004 (external link)
The 17-55mm/2.8 has inconsistent autofocus when focusing on distant objects. This was discussed at length before here at POTN.

https://photography-on-the.net …read.php?t=1427​525&page=1

It is true that many don't notice the problem. But all copies of the lens have the same issue. Those that notice the problem see it in all copies they try.

So it is not right to say there is nothing wrong with the lens. But it might not matter to you, or you might not notice it. In that case, carry on!


I must admit I don't have the ef-s 17-55mm f2.8. I don't even have a camera that can mount it. So I am not really qualified to even comment on its IQ. I have a couple fiends that do have it and they seem to love it. I have helped them with post and was also impressed. Looks good in PS! But personal hands on, no I don't.


G1x, EOS 1Dx, EOS 1D Mk IV, ef 8-15mm f4L,
ef 16-35mm f2.8L II, ef 24-70mm f2.8L II, ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II,
Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport
*** PS 6, ACR 9.3, Lightroom 6.5 ***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
habsnut
THREAD ­ STARTER
Hatchling
5 posts
Joined Nov 2015
Location: Toronto
     
Jul 08, 2016 10:45 |  #33

You guys are all awesome! Thanks to everyone that's replied. This thread has made me realize I might have been thinking about things the wrong way and has got me thinking differently.

MalVeauX wrote in post #18060967 (external link)
If you're going to go full frame, just do it. Otherwise, don't plan on it by using specific glass thinking one day you'll do it. Go for the now. Whatever you get, you can sell and put towards something else if you do switch formats. It doesn't matter much. There's nothing ultimately specific about a full frame that is better enough these days compared to a modern APS-C (let alone some modern Micro 4/3's!) for a lot of photography. Just because someone else uses it for what they do doesn't mean it's the way to go. Focus on what you do and what you want to spend and what you want to get out of it.

17-50 is the 24-70 of APS-C. If you want that focal range that you see on a full frame, then a 17-50 is it.

Otherwise, if you want more quality and speed, the 18-35 F1.8 ART is unrivaled because Sigma has the field on innovating new lenses like this right now.

There's no disadvantage to using APS-C other than yourself. The advantages to full frame are the focal lengths relative to the sensor size producing an angle of view, potentially shallower DOF if you really feel you need it ultra thin for some reason, and a wee bit better high ISO performance. I shoot APS-C, APS-H & Full Frame. I use full frame specifically for how it interacts with focal lengths and depth of field, as I like how wide lenses are more prevalent for a larger sensor, and F2.8 on a full frame is pretty shallow DOF, let alone faster. But other than those two applications, I can use an APS-C and you wouldn't know the difference unless I just told you or you saw the EXIF. And that's the rub.

Very best,

This is some awesome advice, thanks! I think I was caught looking too far down the road and what I could potentially be doing. I don't have the budget right now to go full frame and while it would be nice, this venture isn't making money and until it (ever) does, then I think I should just take the approach of investing in the now like you've suggested. The truth is, I'm using a very good APS-C body and should get the glass to go with it.

Perhaps I just stick with the 17-55 for now, get a longer telephoto / a prime to fill in the gaps and then go from there unless getting the 16-35 1.8 is going to make a noticeable jump in IQ from the 17-55.

DreDaze wrote in post #18060951 (external link)
the features that make the 7DII cost more than say a 70D aren't something that you would really see a benefit for in event kind of work...you don't need a ton of AF points, don't need 10fps...it just seems like paying more for features that you wouldn't use for events

I see your point. The camera is used for more than just event work, it's my everyday camera and I'm trying to play around with different types of photography as a hobby. Also, I did get the 7DII for a really good price so it just made sense to get it instead of the 70D at the time.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
8,248 posts
Gallery: 372 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 15279
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Jul 08, 2016 10:50 |  #34

ebiggs wrote in post #18061233 (external link)
I must admit I don't have the ef-s 17-55mm f2.8. I don't even have a camera that can mount it. So I am not really qualified to even comment on its IQ. I have a couple fiends that do have it and they seem to love it. I have helped them with post and was also impressed. Looks good in PS! But personal hands on, no I don't.

The issue is not IQ, it is inconsistent AF.

When autofocusing, the lens sets focus more or less randomly between ~3 meters and infinity. This causes severe front-focusing at times (but not at other times, because it is random). You probably won't notice it at f/8 or 11 because DOF covers the error, nor will you notice it when shooting at a distance of 3 meters (10 feet) or so, because the focus error doesn't often go closer than 3 meters.

The IQ of the lens is fine when it focuses correctly, and that happens reliably in most indoor situations where focusing distances are not too long. The problem shows up mostly when outdoors and shooting at wider apertures. The AF result also depends on the body used with the lens (for instance, it was much worse with the 7D2 until the firmware was updated).


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 77D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ebiggs
Senior Member
Avatar
638 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Spring Hill, KS
     
Jul 08, 2016 20:45 as a reply to  @ Archibald's post |  #35

"I must admit I don't have the ef-s 17-55mm f2.8."

You must have missed this? I bow out as not qualified to speak about it.


G1x, EOS 1Dx, EOS 1D Mk IV, ef 8-15mm f4L,
ef 16-35mm f2.8L II, ef 24-70mm f2.8L II, ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II,
Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport
*** PS 6, ACR 9.3, Lightroom 6.5 ***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mannetti21
Goldmember
Avatar
3,105 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 353
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Connecticut
Post edited over 2 years ago by mannetti21. (2 edits in all)
     
Jul 09, 2016 12:45 |  #36

ebiggs wrote in post #18061227 (external link)
I am sure you can, so can I. All 'L' lenses are not the same just as all ef-s lenses are not the same.



Yes, they do. I have some. Still the build on an 'L' plastic body is better than a ef-s. It is obvious to most people.

No, he doesn't. A lens is made up of all its specs not simply one. I have an 'L' lens except .............!
In his case the OP may be considering just IQ as the main most important spec but in total he does not have an 'L' lens.

People that pooh-pooh 'L' lenses are just kidding themselves.

I'm just going to say this; those people that see a red ring and automatically put the lens on a pedestal are also kidding themselves, and exactly what Canon hopes for. Mind you, this is coming from somebody who owns L, non-L, and 3rd party lenses, so I have zero bias.

The overall purpose for my initial response was to suggest to the the OP that 1) he already has a very capable lens and 2) an L lens is not necessarily going to perform well enough to result in a significant, noticeable difference that would justify the cost increase.

OP, good luck with whatever you decide. The great thing about this hobby is you are never stuck with a single piece of equipment. Whichever lens you choose, you'll likely end up wanting to replace it with something else in the future anyways.



My Buyer/Seller Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ah-keong
Senior Member
Avatar
974 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Likes: 1371
Joined Apr 2016
Post edited over 2 years ago by Ah-keong.
     
Jul 10, 2016 21:10 |  #37

smythie wrote in post #18061122 (external link)
Please re-read my earlier post. I did not imply buying three primes (such as EF 85/1.8, EF 100/2 and EF 135/2L). I implied buying one of those or a similar prime to add to the OP's current kit.

I get the argument that the 50-100 can be seen as multiple fast primes (which I think Ah-kong was trying to imply). It's a pretty good option too. I think though that if you already have a 17-55 , you may not need more than just a single extra prime if you're just looking for some extra focal length. The 135L matches the OP's original request for an L nicely too.

The option I put forward is just that an option. The concept of adding a 50-100 is another option that can also be considered.

I understand where you are coming from. I would like to suggest to the OP some numbers without going into the zoom vs prime(s) debate.

on 1 hand is a Sigma zoom based on latest(2016) Art technology, while on the other hand are primes.
other than the two factors I pointed out price(where I think will go down after some time comparing to the matured primes) and weight.

other factors are volume, change of glasses during shooting, Full Frame compatibility, Image Quality etc etc etc....

every expert(s) out here has different considerations. what may suit me may not suit you. :D
I believe the main consideration of the OP is Image Quality, where I suggest an APS-C specific glass to get the IQ.

Cheers!


Canon 7D2+grip | 18-35mm ART | EF-S 10-18mm | EF 70-200mm f/2,8L IS II | ZE 2/100mm | ZE 2/35mm | ZE 1,4/85mm | CV 3,5/20mm | Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2,8D | DC-Nikkor 105mm f/2D |
Olympus E-PL3 | 7-14mm f/2,8 |
Speedlite 430EX III-RT | 600EX-RT | YN 600EX-RT |
Manfrotto BeFree Travel Tripod |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
artyH
Goldmember
2,097 posts
Likes: 26
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jul 11, 2016 09:52 |  #38

I would consider having Canon check the AF on the lens, if I had AF trouble. The 17-55IS is Canon's event lens for crop. A possible alternative would be a second body with a fast prime...you pick your focal length. It will depend on the event.
If you can't use flash, than fast glass is needed. Full frame helps with low light, but the 17-55 does seem a good bet, given your need for wide and at least short telephoto.
Have you tried microadjust? Perhaps the lens needs it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
8,248 posts
Gallery: 372 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 15279
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Jul 11, 2016 10:24 |  #39

artyH wrote in post #18063876 (external link)
I would consider having Canon check the AF on the lens, if I had AF trouble. The 17-55IS is Canon's event lens for crop.
...
Have you tried microadjust? Perhaps the lens needs it.

Hi, Arty. I'm not quite sure who your post is directed to. Maybe it is responding to more than one post.

Regarding the 17-55mm, I can assure you I have been there. I have covered all the bases. There is no room for doubt any longer. No stone has been left unturned.

After six trips to Canon service in two countries, plus emails and phone calls with Canon service people, and visits to local merchants, I can say I know about the issue of the 17-55mm.

Have you ever tried microadjust on a lens that performs inconsistently? Try it some time. :-(

For more information, follow the link.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 77D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
artyH
Goldmember
2,097 posts
Likes: 26
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jul 13, 2016 10:18 as a reply to  @ Archibald's post |  #40

I was responding to the original posting. After reviewing your 14 page thread, I looked at some photos that were sent to me by a relative who uses the 17-55IS on a T2i. Most of them were not sharp, with about half of them pretty blurry. I had assumed that they were just small files, poor snaps, too low a shutter speed, etc.
This person does get some sharp photos at times, but they not up there with primes or my zooms. I still have a T2i, so it is not the body.
I should mention that there are many times when you might want to shoot at F2.8 or wider in a large space. For example, I once took some photos with my 17-40F4 using my 6D inside a large train station in London. I would have been happier at F2.8 in the low lighting. A number of years ago, I found that an 18-55IS F3.5-F5.6 kit lens was not up to the low light in some parts of Notre Dame. At the long end, F5.6 won't do on older crop bodies.
I would be very unhappy with an expensive F2.8 zoom that won't work reliably in large indoor spaces at F2.8.




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

5,850 views & 9 likes for this thread
Lens upgrade recommendation needed
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 Forgiven1
849 guests, 242 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.