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 21 Dec 2010 (Tuesday) 01:06
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

so im going FF line up question.

 
Andy ­ R
Goldmember
Avatar
1,801 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Likes: 1168
Joined Dec 2008
Location: So Cal
     
Dec 21, 2010 01:06 |  #1

So I have a 50D (thats for sale) and ill be picking up a 5DC, now my question is if i should traid out a lens...i just sold my 10-24mm and still have the tamron 28-75 2.8 and the 70-200f4. i will be keeping the 70-200 and picking up a 50mm 1.4 but im wondering if the 28-75 will cut it, i love this thing on the crop but it will get much wider...

so id like something really wide as i love my uwa and pick up something that was more equivalant to my current set up?

opions on what you would get as a nice walk around lens(s) that would cover a nice uwa but get near where the 70-200 pick up at?
oh and i dont have an endless account so pricing should be simalar to the tamron maybe 17-50?, around 500-600$ or so, if i need to get an uwa later that is fine.
thanks in advance
~Andy


5Dii ~ 80D
Canon 24-105 mkII ~ Canon 50 f1.8 STM ~ Canon 70-200 f4 IS ~ Sigma 100-400 ~ Canon 1.4x mkII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
KVN ­ Photo
Goldmember
Avatar
1,940 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
     
Dec 21, 2010 02:35 |  #2

You may want to consider 17-40, it is very wide on FF, and versatile enough.
Many people are trying one of this combo:

1. FF body + 17-40L +50 + 70-200L
2. FF body + 16-35L or 17-40L + 24-70L + 70-200L

One of those option should serve well in IQ department I think.


X-Pro1 + 18-55 f/2.8-4 OIS + 55-200 f/3.8-4.5 OIS
TS-E 24 f/3.5L II + XF 35 f/1.4 + XF 56 f/1.2
Sony RX100 II + G12
Travel the world!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Breezy900
Senior Member
318 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: CA
     
Dec 21, 2010 05:27 |  #3

I have option 1, and honestly I think its the best setup. You have portraits nailed with the 50, and even the long end of the 17-40, tele for nature wildlife, 17-40 for landscapes 70-200 can also work here.


5D Mark 2 Gripped
17-40L
35L
85 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Andy ­ R
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,801 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Likes: 1168
Joined Dec 2008
Location: So Cal
     
Dec 21, 2010 10:27 |  #4

cool thanks for the options of what people are doing :)


5Dii ~ 80D
Canon 24-105 mkII ~ Canon 50 f1.8 STM ~ Canon 70-200 f4 IS ~ Sigma 100-400 ~ Canon 1.4x mkII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
versedmb
Goldmember
4,448 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Apr 2006
     
Dec 21, 2010 12:02 |  #5

KY707 wrote in post #11489407 (external link)
...

1. FF body + 17-40L +50 + 70-200L
....

Nice "starter" FF set up, as long as you don't mind not having a "standard" zoom. I would add the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 - very sharp, inexpensive and light weight lens.


Gear List

Michael

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,002 posts
Likes: 986
Joined Dec 2006
     
Dec 21, 2010 12:05 |  #6

I get a lot of use from my F4 trinity, the 17-40, the 24-105, and the 70-200F4IS. Match that up with a fast prime of your choice for portrait/low light work and you are good to go.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
carlXSI
Senior Member
315 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Dec 21, 2010 12:31 |  #7

Check out this thread: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=874708

I agree with gonzogolf that the F4 trinity + 85 1.8 will cover everything for you.


6D | 17-40L | 70-200L | 35 2.0 IS | 430ex II | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jeff81
Goldmember
Avatar
1,689 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Dec 2008
Location: SoCal
     
Dec 21, 2010 13:00 |  #8

versedmb wrote in post #11491425 (external link)
Nice "starter" FF set up, as long as you don't mind not having a "standard" zoom. I would add the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 - very sharp, inexpensive and light weight lens.

I'll echo this. I used the tamron 28-75 on my 5D2 and thought it worked great as a standard zoom. I used my primes more, but when I wanted a zoom, it fit the bill.


6D | Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Sigma 50 f/1.4 Art, Canon 85 f/1.8
flickr (external link)
Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
reprazent
Goldmember
Avatar
1,045 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2009
     
Dec 21, 2010 13:12 |  #9

I'd stick with what you have right now. 28-75 and 70-200 is all you need for FF. The tamron will make a great walkaround lens.
(it was the first lens that I purchased for my 5D)

You can always get yourself a wider lens later if you want to go ultra wide.


gearlist | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
picturecrazy
soft-hearted weenie-boy
Avatar
8,561 posts
Likes: 428
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Alberta, CANADA
     
Dec 21, 2010 13:29 |  #10

Here's a suggestion out of left field. Your lens setup is not ideally suited for crop, which is probably why you want to upgrade. You'd likely get more benefit from getting a great crop lens setup than spending cash on a FF body. A nice 17-50 and a wider prime would really round out your flexibility a lot more than using a FF body with a $600 lens budget.


-Lloyd
The BOUDOIR - Edmonton Intimate Boudoir Photography (external link)
Night and Day Photography - Edmonton Studio Family Baby Child Maternity Wedding Photographers (external link)
Night and Day Photography - Edmonton Headshot Photographers (external link)
Facebook (external link) | Twitter (external link) |Instagram (external link) | Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cueball
Senior Member
Avatar
483 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 41
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Illinois
     
Dec 21, 2010 13:30 |  #11

gonzogolf wrote in post #11491435 (external link)
I get a lot of use from my F4 trinity, the 17-40, the 24-105, and the 70-200F4IS. Match that up with a fast prime of your choice for portrait/low light work and you are good to go.

I shoot crop as well but I've thought about switching to this trinity (selling my 70-200 f2.8L IS and replacing it with the f4 L IS version and 17-40). I can see myself possibly going full frame and this would be a great way to cover a broad range of focal lengths (it would work well on my 40D as well). My current 70-200 was great for when my daughter was figure skating but now that she's doing gymnastics I'm going to have to start getting a few primes to work with.

I'm not sure how good the OP's 28-70 is but I can attest to the 24-105 being a very good lens that gets the job done about 80% of the time for me. Even on FF it might not get as wide as what the OP wants though.


Canon: 5D Mark IV, 16-35 f4L IS, 24-70 f2.8L II, 70-200 f2.8L IS II, 100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS II, 100 f2.8L IS Macro, 2X III, 1.4X III, 580EX II, 430EX | mu43: Olympus OMD EM-1, 17 f1.8, 45 f1.8, 75 f1.8, 12-40 f2.8 PRO, 40-150 f2.8 PRO, MC-14
Feedback: https://photography-on-the.net …=12723614&postc​ount=27889, https://photography-on-the.net …=13303433&postc​ount=30051

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Fogflip
Member
Avatar
133 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 9
Joined Sep 2010
     
Dec 21, 2010 13:35 |  #12

I recently went FF and my combo so far has been 16-35, 24-70, 70-200 is II. I rarely find my self using my 24-70 any more except for indoor events partys etc and some times as a walk around. Hopefully switching it to a 50 mm prime soon.


5d mkII~~30D~~24-70 l series~~70-200 II
My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommydigi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,538 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 378
Joined May 2010
Location: Chicago
     
Dec 21, 2010 13:41 as a reply to  @ picturecrazy's post |  #13

I agree with Picturecrazy about having the right lens. Putting a cheap lens on a full frame camera is probably not the best solution but putting a good 17-50 or 15-85 would be more ideal.

That being said I also like the idea of going with F4 zooms and non L primes. I have 2.8 zooms and I too am getting tired of the weight. I added it up and my 24-70/70-200 2.8 combined weight is about 5 pounds where the 24-105/70-200 F4IS is about 3.

- Edit - forgot to mention that the Tamron is a pretty decent lens so if you are set on going full frame shoot for a while and see if you find it lacking. I sorta did, I had the Tamron 28-75 and I switched to the 24-105 then 24-70. I found the difference the Canon focused more accurately, had better colors/contrast ( more accurate ) but the Tamron was not bad and 28 will be pretty wide on full frame.


Website (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)
Canon 5DII • 7DII • G15 • 24LII • 50L • 100L • 135L • 40 STM • 16-35L F4 IS • 24-70L F4 IS • 100-400L II • 1.4x • 600EX II • 270 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cskorik
Senior Member
845 posts
Joined Aug 2008
     
Dec 21, 2010 15:25 |  #14

The Sigma 12-24 is the last UWA you'll ever need. My copy (at least) is sharp and accurate, and there's no wider full-frame lens available!


My portfolio (external link)!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Andy ­ R
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,801 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Likes: 1168
Joined Dec 2008
Location: So Cal
     
Dec 22, 2010 01:33 |  #15

thanks for the advice, ill stick with my 28-75 and see if it will suit my needs, and if it does then just pic up and uwa for it later on. i like the idea of the 17-50 but i think it will be just a tad wide for a good walk around zoom...but i think the higher iso capabilities might allow me to get by with an f4 lens if in not happy with the tamron...thanks again for all your help :)


5Dii ~ 80D
Canon 24-105 mkII ~ Canon 50 f1.8 STM ~ Canon 70-200 f4 IS ~ Sigma 100-400 ~ Canon 1.4x mkII

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

3,518 views & 0 likes for this thread
so im going FF line up question.
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 Weekkey
867 guests, 410 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.