What lens to pair with 6D MK II

I'm planning on getting the 6D MK II, but what lens to get with it? My budget is $1100.

Photography is my hobby. I shoot mostly landscape, nature, travel, macro, not a lot of portraits. I rented a 6D MK I with the 24-105 MK I on a recent trip to Yellowstone and I was mostly satisfied, except the AF drove me batty (focus, recompose, focus, recompose...). Also, needed a second lens with longer reach that was lighter than my 100-400 MK I when hiking. I ended up tossing my SL1 and the EF-S 55-250 in my backpack.

Should I just get the 24-105 MK II version and keep using the SL1 with the 55-250 when needed?

Should I get the 24-105 MKI because the reviews for the MK II version don't show a big improvement over the original? If I go that route, should I think refurbished, white box/grey, or used? Then I would take the savings and pick up the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM, and again should I go MK I, MK II, refurbished, grey or used?

I guess the 24-70 f/4 paired with the 70-300 is also a possibility if I can get a used 70-300 for cheap, but I kinda hate to change lens all the time. Right now, my favorite combo is 15-85 on my crop body.

Thanks for your help!

repete7 wrote in post #18389638
I'm planning on getting the 6D MK II, but what lens to get with it? My budget is $1100.

Photography is my hobby. I shoot mostly landscape, nature, travel, macro, not a lot of portraits. I rented a 6D MK I with the 24-105 MK I on a recent trip to Yellowstone and I was mostly satisfied, except the AF drove me batty (focus, recompose, focus, recompose...). Also, needed a second lens with longer reach that was lighter than my 100-400 MK I when hiking. I ended up tossing my SL1 and the EF-S 55-250 in my backpack.

Should I just get the 24-105 MK II version and keep using the SL1 with the 55-250 when needed?

Should I get the 24-105 MKI because the reviews for the MK II version don't show a big improvement over the original? If I go that route, should I think refurbished, white box/grey, or used? Then I would take the savings and pick up the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM, and again should I go MK I, MK II, refurbished, grey or used?

I guess the 24-70 f/4 paired with the 70-300 is also a possibility if I can get a used 70-300 for cheap, but I kinda hate to change lens all the time. Right now, my favorite combo is 15-85 on my crop body.

Thanks for your help!

My favorite lens on a crop body was also the EF-S 15-85. When I went FF, I originally had a used 24-105 f/4L v1. The photos were fine, but the AF, IS, and level of noise from the focusing and IS bothered me. I traded it towards the 24-105 f/4L v2. AF is fast, IS is excellent, zooming is smooth, and the lens is virtually silent. I'm happy I did the upgrade; but, as you have seen, many people don't think it's worth it.

My wife has the EF 70-300 II. She likes it much better than the EF-S 55-250 STM that it replaced. She uses it on a 70D, and her photos are better than her previous lens.

I don't like buying used. When I do, it's usually from a dealer who has at least a 2-week return policy. I do buy refurbished if the item I want is available. I don't buy grey market. Too many potential return and warranty hassles. I also check CanonPriceWatch if I'm buying new (my 5D4 was purchased through them). Their street prices do save some money if they have the item you want.

So I guess my recommendation would be the 24-105 II with the 6D2, and continuing to use your SL1 and 55-250 when needed.

my guess is you'll never touch the SL1 again so I would not factor that camera into my decision. I bought an SL1 when they first came out. took it to Yellowstone thinking in good light i'd use it instead of my 5d3 for wildlife.

i got very close to a harem of pronghorns and had the opportunity to really score. used the SL1 instead of the 5d3. big mistake that i regret to this day.

when i got home and viewed my files on my computer it was deja vu flashback all over again to my early DSLR days when i would not select the best image but the ones that were the sharpest. also, the files weren't nearly as good as FF and noise was very obvious even at ISO400.

the 6d2 will have so many more advantages and pro AF is a big one!

my vote is for 16-34L F4, 24-105 or 24-70 f4 and 70-300L.

LJ3Jim wrote in post #18389826
When I went FF, I originally had a used 24-105 f/4L v1. The photos were fine, but the AF, IS, and level of noise from the focusing and IS bothered me. I traded it towards the 24-105 f/4L v2. AF is fast, IS is excellent, zooming is smooth, and the lens is virtually silent. I'm happy I did the upgrade; but, as you have seen, many people don't think it's worth it.

Thanks for the advice. Its good to hear from someone who has shot with both lenses. Can I ask what FF body are you shooting with?

ed rader wrote in post #18390070
my vote is for 16-34L F4, 24-105 or 24-70 f4 and 70-300L.

If I could buy all those for $1100 I would order today!

I agree that the noise and focus on the SL1 are not good. I wouldn't use it if I had a better option handy. But, it is extremely lightweight and cheap, I can throw it my back pack and not worry about it. I'm not expecting keepers from it, mostly want photos to identify birds later, but occasionally, it pulls through.

i'll bet. you might have to do like I did. buy one at a time

I also had the 24-105 I and II. The first one since 2006, just recently sold. That lived on my 30D, 50D then 7D2 for the 10 years. I'm now using the new 24-105 II on a 5D4. It's SOOO much better on a FF camera (but we all knew that). I totally think it's worth the upgrade over version 1.

As much as I like it, I'm still contemplating the 24-70 II since it's just so good...everyone says. I'm just worried about giving up the image stabilization.

It really is a great lens and that extra 70-105 I use quite often.

repete7 wrote in post #18390253
Thanks for the advice. Its good to hear from someone who has shot with both lenses. Can I ask what FF body are you shooting with?

5D4.

Ascenta wrote in post #18390688
I also had the 24-105 I and II. The first one since 2006, just recently sold. That lived on my 30D, 50D then 7D2 for the 10 years. I'm now using the new 24-105 II on a 5D4. It's SOOO much better on a FF camera (but we all knew that). I totally think it's worth the upgrade over version 1.

As much as I like it, I'm still contemplating the 24-70 II since it's just so good...everyone says. I'm just worried about giving up the image stabilization.

It really is a great lens and that extra 70-105 I use quite often.

I had the 24-70 mk2 and gave up with it because it didn't have IS.
My 24-105 mk2 is my most used lens and I think it's really good.

A lens that does not get that much love here is the one that I went to after using the 24-105 on a 7D for many years. When I went to a full frame 5D Mark III, the wide end distortion on the 24-105 made me sea sick. So I decided to add a 24-70....... But which one?
F/2.8 L Mark II vs. f/4 L IS.
Sharper, heavier, twice the price vs slightly less image quality, IS and half the price........and a pretty darn good Macro too.
So I decided to go with my heart.......When in doubt? Punt, Slide, IS.
So I purchased the 24-70 f/4 L IS. A darn fine lens. Much better controlled wide end distortion, much better color and sharpness through out compared to my old trusty 24-105, which is still in my possession.
And the Macro Mode is much better than I anticipated. Does it replace my 100 Macro L IS, no. However when traveling abroad, the 100 L does me no good on the other side of the Atlantic.
So I have no problem what so ever in recommending the 24-70 f/4 L IS in a smaller lighter package as well.

I'd also vote for the 24-70 F4 IS, maybe add a small cheap prime to the mix ( 35, 40stm, 50 etc ). I'm surprised at how much I enjoy this lens. I've owned the 24-70 2.8 v1 and the 24-105 v1 and I prefer this lens for many reasons mentioned above. Seems like the ideal lens for a 6d2.

I also just pre-ordered the 6D MK II and Im in the same (which lens) boat. This will be my first FF DSLR coming from a 70D. I am leaning towards the 24-105 II and the 16-35 f4 right now.

firemanchip wrote in post #18391277
I also just pre-ordered the 6D MK II and Im in the same (which lens) boat. This will be my first FF DSLR coming from a 70D. I am leaning towards the 24-105 II and the 16-35 f4 right now.

Welcome to my club! I guess I'm leaning toward the 24-105 II as well. I seriously considered the 24-70 f/4, but when I rented the original 6d and 24-105 about 25% of my shots were at focal lengths longer than 70, so I think the 24-70 would be just a little too short for me. I'm going to have to sleep on it though.

It's always hard to say what "one" lens is "best" to pair with. Different strokes for different folks. At one time I had an old Tamron 28-70mm. I then was contemplating a 24-70 2.8 Tamron or Canon for my 5D3. Once I borrowed the 24-70 2.8 LII, I was sold on the extra cost for it. It is pretty sharp at all FLs and apertures, and it has good AF. With its focal length, I'm also taking photos of subjects that can't use a slow shutter speed (so I don't miss IS). I think the mkII will pair nicely for any new Canon model, since it's well suited for higher MP. It also pairs well with a 70-200mm, and 16-35 (or 11-24 if you can afford that). As for me, I'm pretty set with my lens selection. I admit that I do have some lust for the 5D4, but currently can't justify another photographic purchase. This was my field test that sold me on the Canon 24-70 2.8 II:

IMAGE LINK: https://davesrose.smug​mug.com/DragonCon-2014/i-BjZSswn/A

davesrose wrote in post #18391285
It's always hard to say what "one" lens is "best" to pair with. Different strokes for different folks.

You're right. I should have specified best first walkaround lens to buy. Love your Zombie pic.