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 08 Mar 2017 (Wednesday) 04:34
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

What Lens Would You Get Rid Of?

 
sa_20v
Member
47 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2008
Location: London
     
Mar 08, 2017 04:34 |  #1

Hi guys, I seem to have amassed lenses which overlap each other and need to downsize (I rarely use the kit now with a young family and lugging around a million lenses and a toddler is not enjoyable).

I use crop cameras (70d, 40d). This is what the (heavy) bag contains:

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM (often too much on a crop but outstanding when I can focus it!)
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (just amazing)
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM (great)
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM (great)
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM (love for cityscapes but rarely used)
Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 (just goes in the bag when I'm out and about with the 40d)

I just wondered, if in my position, what you would all do? Which would you ditch? I guess the obvious is either the 24-105mm or 17-55mm but they're both amazing in slightly different ways and I've thought about this for so long that I've lost all objectivity!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
MatthewK
Goldmember
Avatar
4,086 posts
Gallery: 747 photos
Likes: 12944
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Maryland
     
Mar 08, 2017 04:50 |  #2

Probably the 24 f/2.8 and the 24-105. If you're cutting real deep, 10-22, but it adds some focal versatility so I would be hesitant to cut it.

If you find the 50mm too long on crop, sell that too, and replace with the 35mm f/2.0 IS.

Canon EF 35mm f/2.0 IS
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM


.:: GAS-Free 'til July 2020 ::. for real this time, I swear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2739
Joined Oct 2015
     
Mar 08, 2017 04:50 |  #3

I don't sell lenses anymore. I've already bought 3 or 4 of them a second time.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LonelyBoy
Goldmember
1,474 posts
Gallery: 83 photos
Likes: 969
Joined Oct 2014
     
Mar 08, 2017 06:15 |  #4

I'd swap the 24-105L for the 18-135 STM or nUSM, or the 15-85. That's a pretty heavy zoom to be carting around for a crop that doesn't need it at that focal range. Or just use the 17-55 and swap to the 70-200 if you need more reach, but that's less convenient if you're often switching from one end of the 24-105 to the other.

Do you need the speed of the 50? If you can handle the loss of two stops of light, the 40 STM would save some weight and produces good images. Or skip the 40 and just use your 17-55, but the 40 is very light to carry.

Your other heavy lenses are the 17-55 and 70-200, and it's really hard to come close to replicating those if you need the light. Though I suppose again, if you can handle losing some speed, the 70-200/4 is lighter.


https://www.flickr.com​/photos/127590681@N03/ (external link)
I love a like, but feedback (including CC) is even better!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
iowajim
Senior Member
Avatar
518 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 52
Joined Mar 2011
Location: North Central Iowa
     
Mar 08, 2017 06:44 |  #5

Bassat wrote in post #18295075 (external link)
I don't sell lenses anymore. I've already bought 3 or 4 of them a second time.

This. If you don't need the cash, and if you are happy with all those lenses, tuck away those you aren't expecting to need for a specific event. If you aren't happy with any of them, sell.


Jim, in Iowa
80D / T2i / Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 / Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 / Canon 24-105 f4 / Tamron SP VC 70-200mm f2.8 / Sigma 150-600mm C

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
trailblazer
Senior Member
Avatar
586 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 33
Joined Dec 2007
     
Mar 08, 2017 06:50 |  #6

I happily used just the 17-55 and 70-200 for about 7 years and I shot everything from weddings, to family, to landscape, corporate and product.

Rent when you need something else. One off uses, such as your 10-22 don't count to me as a must have.

I would sell the rest, or leave them home if you think you might still need them.

I'm now using more lenses than last year, and upgraded all my gear, but when I'm going out with family, I just walk with the 24-70 and 70-200, which harkens back to when I was using crop with the 17-55 and 70-200.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
photosbytw
Goldmember
Avatar
1,343 posts
Gallery: 48 photos
Likes: 1209
Joined Jan 2015
Location: Blue Ridge Mountains
     
Mar 08, 2017 06:59 |  #7

I'm with Bassat...............i​t seems that I soon need the lens that I've just sold:rolleyes:


Don't even begin to think I'm criticizing your images.
Just a natural curiosity.
tw

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sa_20v
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
47 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2008
Location: London
     
Mar 09, 2017 08:48 |  #8

Thanks all - surprised there's so little love for the 24-105 - although I guess superceded, two stops worse than the 17-55, heavy and awkward focal length on crop given my other lenses.

I'll ditch that and consider the rest - thanks for helping me come to a decision! :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,710 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3846
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited over 2 years ago by Tom Reichner.
     
Mar 09, 2017 10:21 |  #9

.
The only lenses in that list that I would keep are the 24-105mm and the 70-200mm. None of the others would get used, and might as well be sold off.

sa_20v wrote in post #18296223 (external link)
Thanks all - surprised there's so little love for the 24-105 - although I guess superceded, two stops worse than the 17-55..........

Am I missing something? I thought that the 24-105mm was just one stop slower than the 17-55mm.

sa_20v wrote in post #18296223 (external link)
.........awkward focal length on crop given my other lenses.

I actually find the focal length range of the 24-105 more useful on my crop bodies than I do on my full frame body. It is actually an extremely useful range on a 1.6 crop.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Mar 09, 2017 10:51 |  #10

sa_20v wrote in post #18296223 (external link)
Thanks all - surprised there's so little love for the 24-105 - although I guess superceded, two stops worse than the 17-55, heavy and awkward focal length on crop given my other lenses.

You forgot: huge distortion and vignetting, reliability issues, cannot resolve newer sensors.
Still surprised ? :)

Nevertheless, it is used by many full-frame photographers who only want to bring a single lens.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,012 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6100
Joined Sep 2007
     
Mar 09, 2017 10:52 |  #11

you dont have to get rid of anything, simply stop bringing anything except for the 24 and see how that works out.

if I were in your shoe, the 50 1.4 would be replaced with 50 1.8 stm and 24-105 would be gone.

you can try to force yourself to be simple, use only 1 or 2 lenses.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hokie ­ Jim
Member
130 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 27
Joined Jan 2016
Location: Hillsborough, NC
     
Mar 09, 2017 11:16 |  #12

I'd sell the 24-105, but I'm also a big fan of primes.

24, 50, and a 100/2.8L would probably be what I'd end up with ;)


The machine does not isolate man from the great problems of nature but plunges him more deeply into them. - Antoine de Saint Exupéry
Canon 6D | 16-35 f/4L IS | Zeiss Milvus 50 f/1.4 | 70-200 f/2.8L IS II | 580EXII | Gitzo 1410MK2/RRS BH-55

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,710 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3846
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Mar 09, 2017 11:34 |  #13

.

CheshireCat wrote in post #18296319 (external link)
You forgot: huge distortion and vignetting.........

The OP only uses 1.6 crop body cameras.
Are vignetting and distortion really a concern when using these bodies?

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
s1a1om
Senior Member
Avatar
509 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 461
Joined Jul 2013
Location: Hartford, CT, USA
Post edited over 2 years ago by s1a1om. (2 edits in all)
     
Mar 09, 2017 11:50 |  #14

If you *need* to get rid of something why not just start with what you use the least? That would argue for getting rid of the 10-22 and 24. I love the 16-35 on my full frame body, so I wouldn't get rid of the 10-22 which is comparable on a crop body. But if you don't use it, why keep it?

The other way of looking at it is to get rid of the duplicates? You have 3 lenses that cover 24mm and 3 that cover 50mm. Do you shoot a lot of places where you need the fast primes? It would be easy to get rid of the 50 and 24 if you don't need the low light performance since those focal lengths are covered by other lenses. If you need to fast primes for low light situations, then 24-105 could be easy to get rid of since you already covered that range by the 24, 50, and 70-200. You could also get rid of the 17-55 which is covered by the 10-22, 24-105, and 24.

If you're mainly shooting family portraits, then the 50 and 70-200 would probably be my first choices to keep. They both are known for taking great portraits. If you're trying to capture less posed shots, then you can't argue with the flexibility of zooms and the 24-105 is a great since it can do ok in smaller well lit indoor spaces as well as larger outdoor spaces.

On the other hand, personally, I would just keep them all and just pull out the ones you need for any given shoot.


Constructive criticism is always appreciated.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,482 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Likes: 1521
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Mar 09, 2017 11:58 |  #15

Personally, I'd ditch the 50 and 24, and if you don't use the 10-22, maybe that one. Although, it's such a nice tool to have in the arsenal when you want/need wide. The rest are all pretty darned useful on a crop sensor, IMO. I've tried and tried to like the 50 on my various bodies and it just sits gathering dust; and the 24, while nice to have a light prime is covered handily by your 17-55.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

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

6,419 views & 25 likes for this thread
What Lens Would You Get Rid Of?
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 Giku
824 guests, 296 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.