Keep the dream (lens) alive!

I just want to share my lens line up story .
I just bought the 17-40L, I got a great deal, and decided to snag it. I was saving up for either of the 16-35's, the 2.8 II or the f4 IS. I know it is not as sharp as either of them, and by now it is fairly long in the tooth, but I enjoy using superwides.
And it is replacing an old tamron 20-40mm , not as wide, and with a focus speed that makes the 50mm f1.8II look like a speed demon! I also disliked the 1.5 feet minimum focusing distance. After some initial tests, it is also immediately clear that the L is sharper, even in the corners!. The saving graces that it had, were that it was my widest glass, and also is an f2.8-3.5 lens. So faster than my 24-105L.

But I digress, after having it for a couple days and so far loving it (and imagining how much sharper the new f4 version could be, or how much less DoF I could get from the f2.8 one) I realized that I have most of all my dream lenses. Ever since I bought the original rebel there were some lenses that I dreamt of having, the 17-40L (instead of the kit lens) was one of them. The 85 f1.8 was one that I always wanted for a long time, I thought that owning the L was a pipe dream. After owning a bunch of rebels and a 7D I moved to full frame, with a 6D and the 24-105L. My situation improved slightly, so for the last couple years I have been able to buy one of my dream lenses every year, the the 135L, the 50L, the 85L and now the 17-40. I have had to make some personal sacrifices (working 2 jobs, always taking the bus, no going out) but little by little my lens line up is getting to be where I am satisfied with.
And if you would have told me 20 years ago that my L lens collection would include so many incredible lenses I would not have believed you. Heck, I wouldn't have believed it 5 years ago.

So, just keep the dream alive and work towards your goal. I still want to upgrade my macro to the L version, upgrade my 70-200 from the f4 to the f2.8 IS II, the 24-70 f2.8 sounds great, but I love the range and the IS of the 24-105L. And of course an extra body. But for now I am happy.

I would love to hear from you guys, what are your dream lenses? Are you any closer to getting them?

My "problem" is I already have most of the attainable lenses I want. The last ones would be the 135L and maybe the Venus Laowa 15mm macro. Not a whole lot of use for WA/UWA on my end.

Moncho wrote in post #18409182
I just want to share my lens line up story .
I just bought the 17-40L, I got a great deal, and decided to snag it. I was saving up for either of the 16-35's, the 2.8 II or the f4 IS. I know it is not as sharp as either of them, and by now it is fairly long in the tooth, but I enjoy using superwides.
And it is replacing an old tamron 20-40mm , not as wide, and with a focus speed that makes the 50mm f1.8II look like a speed demon! I also disliked the 1.5 feet minimum focusing distance. After some initial tests, it is also immediately clear that the L is sharper, even in the corners!. The saving graces that it had, were that it was my widest glass, alnd also is an f2.8-3.5 lens. So faster than my 24-105L.

But I digress, after having it for a couple days and so far loving it (and imagining how much sharper the new f4 version could be, or how much less DoF I could get from the f2.8 one) I realized that I have most of all my dream lenses. Ever since I bought the original rebel there were some lenses that I dreamt of having, the 17-40L (instead of the kit lens) was one of them. The 85 f1.8 was one that I always wanted for a long time, I thought that owning the L was a pipe dream. After owning a bunch of rebels and a 7D I moved to full frame, with a 6D and the 24-105L. My situation improved slightly, so for the last couple years I have been able to buy one of my dream lenses every year, the the 135L, the 50L, the 85L and now the 17-40. I have had to make some personal sacrifices (working 2 jobs, always taking the bus, no going out) but little by little my lens line up is getting to be where I am satisfied with.
And if you would have told me 20 years ago that my L lens collection would include so many incredible lenses I would not have believed you. Heck, I wouldn't have believed it 5 years ago.

So, just keep the dream alive and work towards your goal. I still want to upgrade my macro to the L version, upgrade my 70-200 from the f4 to the f2.8 IS II, the 24-70 f2.8 sounds great, but I love the range and the IS of the 24-105L. And of course an extra body. But for now I am happy.

I would love to hear from you guys, what are your dream lenses? Are you any closer to getting them?

Mocho.
In January of 2014 I needed to buy an Ultra-Wide Zoom for my recently delivered under the tree full frame 5D Mark III. The choices then were the 16-35 f/2.8 L II and the 17-40 f/4 L. Since most of my needs in this focal length were stopped down, I went for the smaller, lighter half the cost 17-40 f/4 L.
For a few months this lens fit my needs. Then of course Canon introduced 16-35 f/4 L IS. Sharper through out. Improved corner to corner sharpness and of course Image Stabilization. For another year I happily shot with 17-40 f/4 L.
Not until a trip to Rome in the summer of 2015 forced my hand into upgrading to the new 16-35 f/4 L IS. Being able to hand hold at 1/10" in the Basilica's proved the added benefit of IS.
However...I still have the 17-40 f/4 L. It is still a mighty fine lens....period.
It has more value to me for a second shooter at a Wedding or as a back up for me if my 16-35 f/4 L IS needs service.
Enjoy your new 17-40 f/4 L. I know I did and still do.

I want a 50L or 50art and either 100-400ii or a 400 5.6.

Just sold my 6D as it is getting long in the tooth. Pity the 6Dii is only a replacement and not an upgrade. I am content with my 80D for the moment. I can see myself going 7Diii and 5Dv, or neither and just a 1Dxiii. That is a few years down the track and they will have to be market leading.

Moncho.
Do you own the 70-200 f/4 L or the 70-200 f/4 L IS?

I'd love to have an 85L II, or 85A.

There are a range of L lenses that are within reach. The fast super telephotos certainly aren't, but a used 135mm L was one of my first lens purchases when I went from film to DSLR. I had a Tamron 28-70mm for quite some time, as my standard zoom. If just looking at photos from it: they seemed nice and sharp. Then I felt like I was ready to try seeing about the new 24-70mm lenses: I then borrowed the L II and saw that images were sharper and had better color contrast in the shadows. Enjoy your L!

Nick5 wrote in post #18409571
Moncho.
Do you own the 70-200 f/4 L or the 70-200 f/4 L IS?

I own the one without IS, back then I couldn't afford the extra money for it.

Truthfully, my dream setup right now is A7R III with 12-24, the weight an d potential DR for landscape work are salivating. ߘ

Nick5:
I know the IS in the 16-35f4 is useful, it is one of the reasons I can't let go of my 24-105! Especially when hand holding for video.
But in the end, it is not a focal range that I use very often. But this might change now that I have a decent one. Like I said, it is a definite improvement. And so far I am enjoying the perspective distortion and the deep DoF it provides. This coming from a confessed fast lens lover.

Bassat wrote in post #18409572
I'd love to have an 85L II, or 85A.

Keep at it! I've wanted the 50L ( back then the f1.0) ever since the film days. If you live in the states you should rent them and give them a try.
I always liked Jeep Renegades... Until I drove one.

i am really blessed with a pretty understanding wife and a good job that allows me to spend money on things many in this world would consider frivolous...

that said, ive got my set up pretty much where i like it. 24-70 f2.8L II, 70-200 f2.8L IS I, 50 f1.4 and a 5D3 body...

if i were to add one thing and ONLY one thing id get another body. i like the notion of a 1D4 i guess just for the little bit of crop factor but unless i get a 1Dx or 'xII it would probably be another 5D3...


with all THAT said, my single most often "ask Santa for" lens is a nice 300 f2.8L IS. i dont think I PERSONALLY could tell the difference between a mk I, II or III. my 70-200 was a used lens purchase and i dont think id have any concerns buying the 300 used, just have other things to spend money on right now...

2nd most desired lens would be the 16-35 f2.8L II or III. i rarely have a need for anything wider than 24mm but i SOMETIMES wish i had a few more degrees in the F.O.V...

Moncho wrote in post #18409636
Nick5:
I know the IS in the 16-35f4 is useful, it is one of the reasons I can't let go of my 24-105! Especially when hand holding for video.
But in the end, it is not a focal range that I use very often. But this might change now that I have a decent one. Like I said, it is a definite improvement. And so far I am enjoying the perspective distortion and the deep DoF it provides. This coming from a confessed fast lens lover.

Moncho.
I am a firm believer in IS. It is well worth the investment. Maybe down the road like most of you may decide to upgrade. In the meantime, that 17-40 will capture stunning images for you.
Speaking of IS, in 2009 I wanted to buy a 70-200 L. The choices were f/2.8 and f/4 with IS or without.
So the two choices with Image Stabilization were the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS version1 and the newer sharper, lighter half the cost 70-200 f/4 L IS. As there were rumors of an f/2.8 L IS Mark II were on the horizon, I decided for the improved optics the f/4 showed. As I knew I could always sell the f/4 L IS and apply towards the new f/2.8 Mark II..............
So for over a year I shot happily with this f/4 Champ.
After release and release of funds I bought the new f/2.8 L IS Mark II. Wow! Sharp, crisp like the f/4 and f/2.8. What's not to like. So the f/4 sat in the corner for a few years. Since it was so good, I was in no hurry to sell it or trade it in.
Now on the other side of 50, I look at things differently. Since the f/4 was soooooooo good in the 16-35 f/4 L IS, I bought the smaller lighter 24-70 f/4 L IS. With images from 16-70 with f/4 L IS why not continue 70-200 with the f/4 L IS as well.....lugging around the 70-200 f/2.8 can take it's along with two gripped bodies and the 16-35 and 24-70.
So last summer I dug in and left my wonderful 70-200 f/2.8 L IS Mark II at home and swapped it for the 70-200 f/4 L IS for a trip to Iceland. If f/4 and IS worked in Rome, why not there. Images sharp and crisp and no shoulder or back pain while walking and carrying a big bag. Traveling light is not my thing........lighter..​...maybe.
This summer again I traveled to Portugal and Spain with my Greek Trilogy of the Canon f/4 L IS.... The 16-35, 24-70 and the 70-200 f/4 L IS.
As far as my 70-200 f/2.8 L IS Mark II, I am now using that when I know f/2.8 may be crucial. Otherwise I am putting my old friend, the 70-200 f/4 L IS to work.
Depending on the job determines which 70-200 gets the work.
Just something to think about when you purchase a 70-200 with IS.

In a similar fashion, that's why I don't get rid of my 50mm f1.8.
I will be sure to look up your travel images. Do you have a blog?

Moncho wrote in post #18409182
I would love to hear from you guys, what are your dream lenses? Are you any closer to getting them?

Every time I think I am set with what I have, and I have a shameful line up of gear for a hobby, something new gets introduced that makes me renew my membership in GAS Anonymous. Right now, I am fighting the urge to get the 80D and the 16-35 f/4.