Sealing the deal...

Will this lens dilemma ever end??? So for much of the year I've been contemplating on the next one to get because I need to step up my game in setting my work apart and a quality lens will help me do so. I use a 6D and shoot everything but primarily weddings and portraits. Used to have five lenses now I'm pretty much lightening the load and only carrying two or three. I'll rent anything else I'll need.

But I'm waffling back and forth between these lenses: Canon 24-105 f/4 I and II, Sigma 24-105, Canon 28-70 f/2.8 or Canon 24-70 f/4L. Ideally I'd have the new 24-70L II, which I am using this weekend for a wedding, but it's WAY out of my price range (as are the new Sigma and Tamron offerings) and I need something rather soon. I'd want a good zoom and one other prime or two. I have the original Sigma 50 and am also wondering if I should keep that or sell it and get the 50L. So many options it's driving me nuts and I just want to be done with it. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

HaHa -- good luck

Stop worrying about acquiring the right gear. No piece of equipment will improve your photography one iota. If you really want/need to step up your game, acquire some talent and vision. I am living proof that having a closet full of bodies/lenses/lights does not produce better results.

man you just brutalized yourself right there

ed rader wrote in post #18462544
man you just brutalized yourself right there

Well, it's TRUE! I also have a piano I don't play for SPIT, and golf clubs that well..., don't golf very well. Or is that me, too? Who cares? I enjoy my toys.

Bassat wrote in post #18462547
Well, it's TRUE! I also have a piano I don't play for SPIT, and golf clubs that well..., don't golf very well. Or is that me, too? Who cares? I enjoy my toys.

In other words, you have golf clubs that can play piano better than you do.
Man, you got [golf] balls !

CheshireCat wrote in post #18462573
In other words, you have golf clubs that can play piano better than you do.
Man, you got [golf] balls !

Almost!ߘ

Bassat wrote in post #18461973
Stop worrying about acquiring the right gear. No piece of equipment will improve your photography one iota. If you really want/need to step up your game, acquire some talent and vision. I am living proof that having a closet full of bodies/lenses/lights does not produce better results.

See my signature...

LonelyBoy wrote in post #18462632
See my signature...

Interesting. I know I already have way too much gear, and I see you represent my dilemma well in your gear list. I see you own the 18-135 STM, 24-105, and 70-200L.

Currently own: 80D/18-55 STM & 6D/24-105 STM/70-200 f/4L IS (and more). I usually grab the 6D/24-105 STM for general shooting.

Considering: Adding an 18-135 STM (or USM) to the 80D kit for more/better coverage. I don't do video with the 6D. I picked up the 18-55 because the 24-105 isn't wide enough on crop.

Your opinion on owning 18-135 STM along with your other gear, please. Do you use it? A lot?

BrandonD wrote in post #18461926
Will this lens dilemma ever end??? So for much of the year I've been contemplating on the next one to get because I need to step up my game in setting my work apart and a quality lens will help me do so. I use a 6D and shoot everything but primarily weddings and portraits. Used to have five lenses now I'm pretty much lightening the load and only carrying two or three. I'll rent anything else I'll need.

But I'm waffling back and forth between these lenses: Canon 24-105 f/4 I and II, Sigma 24-105, Canon 28-70 f/2.8 or Canon 24-70 f/4L. Ideally I'd have the new 24-70L II, which I am using this weekend for a wedding, but it's WAY out of my price range (as are the new Sigma and Tamron offerings) and I need something rather soon. I'd want a good zoom and one other prime or two. I have the original Sigma 50 and am also wondering if I should keep that or sell it and get the 50L. So many options it's driving me nuts and I just want to be done with it. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Bassat wrote in post #18461973
Stop worrying about acquiring the right gear. No piece of equipment will improve your photography one iota. If you really want/need to step up your game, acquire some talent and vision. I am living proof that having a closet full of bodies/lenses/lights does not produce better results.

This is quite simply the fact. New hardware is not going to 'set you're work apart'. It won't.

If you feel your work is not as good as you would like, then you need to become a better photographer.

You, my friend, are the only thing that has the ability to make your work stand out in a sea of hardware collectors.

saea501 wrote in post #18462672
This is quite simply the fact. New hardware is not going to 'set you're work apart'. It won't.

If you feel your work is not as good as you would like, then you need to become a better photographer.

You, my friend, are the only thing that has the ability to make your work stand out in a sea of hardware collectors.

That sums it up nicely. Gear only allows you to express yourself. Much like a piano without a player is a pile of wood and wire.

My MIL visited one day while I had .45 auto laying on the coffee table. She "EEEKKED!" and told me to put it away. "Those things kill people." Not by themselves, my dear. Not by themselves. Ditto better camera gear. You still need to know how to aim it, and when to pull the trigger.

Bassat wrote in post #18461973
Stop worrying about acquiring the right gear. No piece of equipment will improve your photography one iota. If you really want/need to step up your game, acquire some talent and vision. I am living proof that having a closet full of bodies/lenses/lights does not produce better results.

Ansel Adams and others of his era would have probably killed for a modern rebel and a kit lens and lightroom. They didn't need any of that to create some of the most stunning and memorable shots. IMHO, with a few exceptions, namely wildlife, the only thing that will limit your pictures is the maximum aperture, and only on certain shots. Few shots really need f/1.2. f/1.2 and the perfect IQ lens isn't going to make a boring subject interesting. Full disclosure, I am another that has a closet full of lenses that are far from limiting my abilities.

BrandonD wrote in post #18461926
Will this lens dilemma ever end??? So for much of the year I've been contemplating on the next one to get because I need to step up my game in setting my work apart and a quality lens will help me do so. I use a 6D and shoot everything but primarily weddings and portraits. Used to have five lenses now I'm pretty much lightening the load and only carrying two or three. I'll rent anything else I'll need.

But I'm waffling back and forth between these lenses: Canon 24-105 f/4 I and II, Sigma 24-105, Canon 28-70 f/2.8 or Canon 24-70 f/4L. Ideally I'd have the new 24-70L II, which I am using this weekend for a wedding, but it's WAY out of my price range (as are the new Sigma and Tamron offerings) and I need something rather soon. I'd want a good zoom and one other prime or two. I have the original Sigma 50 and am also wondering if I should keep that or sell it and get the 50L. So many options it's driving me nuts and I just want to be done with it. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

i think the canon 24-105 is your best option ... if the 24-70 2.8 is really out of your price range, seems like the Mk I should be within reach.

BrandonD wrote in post #18461926
Will this lens dilemma ever end???

It won't as long as you feed into it.

I would be very interested to see how your photography improves after you buy your new (insert new item here).

Please be sure to post some examples of your improved work.

Bassat wrote in post #18462674
Much like a piano without a player is a pile of wood and wire.

Indeed. But a beautiful one

An amateur player with a better piano will produce better music.
I am not a master photographer, but people could see an improvement in my photos when I moved from crappy lenses to good ones. A nice example is moving from the Canon 50/1.8 to the Zeiss 50/1.7, which I paid just slightly more.

Yes, a crappy player will produce crappy music with the best piano in the world. But his crappy music will sound much better