Canon lenses.. If you could do it all again what would you do different?

Would have bought my 24-105 a lot sooner.

Not bothered with a 50mm f/1.8 - waste of time.

Strangely, I wouldn't I have bought the 18-135 or the 8mm fisheye. I would have picked up the 10-22 refurb that was on special. Probably would have gotten the 17-55 instead of the 18-135.

i'm not sure i would have changed anything.

when i was starting out i was broke. if i was a lens snob back then i never would have gotten any practice because i wouldn't have owned any lenses.

i had the 18-55 that came with my rebel, then got a used tamron 18-200 that was soft as hell with tons of CA but it made me appreciate good glass and i learned how to pan without IS. then i got a 70-200 f/4 and kept upgrading from there. had a sigma 24-70 and 10-20, sold those and got a 16-35 and some primes. eventually sold the 70-200 f/4 and got a 2.8 II, then a 300 2.8, then sold the 300 and got a 400 2.8 II.

point is, i've bought whatever i could afford at the time and the improved my skill until i attracted a level of customers i couldn't serve with the gear i had. then i could afford to upgrade. i have awesome stuff now but i never could have afforded it at the beginning.

It is a long and expensive path between starting out and where you end (and does it really every end?). As much as I love my 5dII and full frame, I might have stayed with a more advanced crop camera, instead of jumping from Rebel to FF. Mostly because the reach became so different, I had to give up my 15-85mm, which I loved so much and find that the 24-105mm doesn't give the same results and f/2.8 lens that zoom and have IS cost so much more than choices for the crop. With that said, I do love my 5dii and then lens that I now have (with the exception of the 24-105). But is has been an expensive path, for sure.

I have enjoyed my journey, the angst, the anticipation, the fulfillment. It has made my life richer.
I love buying and selling camera gear. I hope I never stop.

davidfarina wrote in post #16385101
Going for L lenses instead of cheaper alternatives

Same here. Even then, I wish I skipped the 70-200 f4 and just got the 70-200 2.8 II sooner.

s.l.k wrote in post #16385450
Same here. Even then, I wish I skipped the 70-200 f4 and just got the 70-200 2.8 II sooner.

Yes I admit the 24-70 MK2 and the 70-200 MK2 would have saved me time and money.
My primes sure sit unused now. Down to just two primes now. But these items did not exist back in the day...

I wouldn't have bought the EFS 17-55 (although it was a fantastic lens for a crop body), nor the 7D I put it on.

I quickly realised that full frame was what I wanted, switched and haven't looked back since. Should have saved harder and forked out the extra $$ in the first place, but at the time I was looking the 5Diii body was around AUS $4,000 & the 6D wasn't available.

hollis_f wrote in post #16384490
Instead of buying a 300mm f2.8 IS from Kerso for £2500 five years ago, I wish I'd bought 50 of them - then sold them for £3000 - £3500 each.

Damn capitalist

lens-wise, i progressed the way i wanted to...

with my 7D i had the 17-55 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8L IS. i also picked up a 50 f1.4 for the shallower DOF and ALMOST portrait length in case i decided to shoot some portraits (i ended up shooting a few)...

when i got rid of the 7D, the buyer didnt want any lenses, he just wanted another body so my wife got the 17-55 and her 18-55 kit lens went on the shelf...

i started shooting with Canon in 1976 and never looked back. i sold Canon, Konica and Nikon right out of high school and could have gone with anything at dealer wholesale but stayed with Canon...

....i would spend less time on forums and pgotograph more

I would skipped the 50 f/1.8 and go straight to 50 f/1.4 instead.
Poor autofocus bothers me.

I'm pretty happy with the choice I made when I purchased all my gear and I did toy with the idea of getting the 7D over the 5D2 so I could get the Canon 70-200. But I knew I would still lust for full frame. I have no regrets having the Sigma 70-200, it's a great lens. The Sigma 50 wasn't and after going through 3 dud copies, I'm happy with the first canon copy.

Although now I'm thinking of selling my zooms as I really like the IQ of L primes. I'd love to keep the zooms, but I can't afford to keep them plus L primes.

I am happy with my decisions I have made. I am not someone who buys something in a heartbeat. I think about it for months before buying something.

Is my gear line up the same if someone robbed all my gear, no. I would buy the following If I had to start all over again from now.

- 6D (or 5DII)
- 17-40L
- Sigma 35
- Canon 85LII

There is nothing particularly wrong with the lenses that I purchased but rather a matter of figuring out what was right for me.

One big mistake was following the advice to go with primes. While I recognize that they typically produce better IQ, are faster, lighter, etc I simply won't use them. If I'm not absolutely passionate about a shot I won't put the proper lens on and explore its potential even if it catches my eye. Its a personal thing but the zoom allows me to explore things without making a commitment. I take more photos.
"Zoom with your feet" sounds great but for me just results in lost shots. I can't stand in the middle of the road, step forward over a bridge railing, wade 20 ft into the water, back up enough to get my son playing with his favorite toy, etc.

Pincushion, fringing, flaring and vignetting are not the weakest points in my photography. Lightroom doesn't have a "composition" slider.

In short, I have never had a lens that fell below my skill level but way too many of them just weren't right for me.