Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 14, 2011, 12:23 PM   #1
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default New Glass Options - What would you get in my situation?

I've just sold my Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 which was my backup lens to my 24-105mm f4 Canon as it really wasn't performing well enough (never had to use it in anger, but if I had to the results wouldn't have been nearly the same standard) so I'm looking at complementary/backup options.

First, this is what I have and my thinking.

My main 2 bodies are both 5DmkIIs I also have a 5D and 7D in case one of the main bodies went down.

Lenses, 90% of the time I use a combo of the 24-105mm f4 and 70-200mm f2.8 IS L. I also have a Sigma 50mm f1.4, Canon 85mm f1.8, Sigma 105mm f2.8 and Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 - For crop I have a Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 and Tamron 17-50mm f2.8.

I want to avoid using the 7D and wide lenses if at all possible, so that is an in case of emergency thing.

OK, so as I use the 24-105 and 70-200 so much, I want to ensure that if something went wrong with either I could still shoot my the sort of way I like.

So, obviously the simple options is to get the same glass as backups, or possibly a 24-70mm f2.8 instead of the 24-105. This is a little boring though as doesn't allow me to bring anything else to the party so I'm considering the option of 17-40mm f4 and a 135mm f2. OK, this misses off the 200mm, but I could use the 120-300mm for times when I really must go long, I have no hand holding issues with that lens (I'm 6'6" and not small), however, might get a few looks from the people I'm shooting as it is a beast. I think for most things I should be fine with 135mm at the long end, can always pop that on the 7D if needed.

So does my way of thinking work or have I lost the plot? If it is the latter, what would you suggest in my situation - medical help is not an option?!
__________________
Any problems with a post or thread please use the report button at the bottom left of the post and the team will help sort it out.

Have fun everyone!


See what I'm up to visit my Plymouth Wedding Photography
site or go to my blog.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 14, 2011, 2:14 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Bangor,North Wales
Posts: 3,734
Default

Lost the plot....
Jokes aside though- if the lens you're considering is "only" a back-up(to a kit which covers just about everything..!) get another 24-105 f/4...! That said- a 135mm f/2 would be a nice addition... especially on the APS-C...

Last edited by SIMON40; Dec 14, 2011 at 2:18 PM.
SIMON40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 4:21 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

If I understand correctly, you've got a long lens, you're ok on your APS-C bodies, and you want a 'Full Frame' backup in the event that either of your mid-range lenses fails.

The idea of the Canon 17-40/4 is nice, but practically speaking it doesn't really fill in for anything all by itself.

There really isn't anything that could substitute for the 24-120/4, but you might consider the Tamron 28-75/2.8. At f/4, it's about as good as the 24-120/4, as far as it goes.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 15, 2011, 2:23 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
wave01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,748
Default

Hi Mark you seem to have most things covered and at a push you could get by if you lost a lens. So lets go with your thought of add something to the mix what about canons 16-35 f2.8L a little wider and not as long but does fit with what you have.
wave01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2011, 3:02 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: "Sunny" Seattle
Posts: 390
Default

My vote would be a 70-200F2.8 ISII and/or the 135 F2. That way you have your original F2.8 IS as a backup and what many say is the sharpest lens Canon has made. With the 135 you have a wonderful lens that you know you have always lusted after. Steven
waoldrifleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2011, 3:08 PM   #6
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I'd suggest a Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8, as it's a really good lens and would give you wider apertures if you needed it.

Sorry, I just couldn't resist, since I noticed you just sold a Sigma 24-70mm f.2.8). ;-)

But, all joking aside, the newer Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM lens does test as significantly better than the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L (which is not as good as competing 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses), as well as testing a lot better than the older Sigma lens (the one I'm assuming you just sold), at a lower price point than the camera manufacturers' lenses with very high optical quality (basically, the newer Sigma HSM lens is in the same league for optical quality as the latest Nikon and Sony/CZ 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses, which are both better than the Canon from tests I've seen).

Here's one review of it:

http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?tes...wu&test_ob=172
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2011, 4:26 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Another option might be a Sony A900 with a Zeiss AF 24-70/2.8.

__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2011, 8:13 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
iowa_jim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Central Iowa
Posts: 589
Default

I wonder what you're missing with the existing kit, as you shoot a wedding. A wider lens that works well with a full-frame camera, perhaps?

You've got the low light primes covered with reasonable redundancy (50, 85, 105). Any one of them goes down and you still have a unit that will be reasonably close. If we're going beyond a backup for the kit, the 135 f2 would be the easy choice.

The 24-105 is not backed-up by any one lens, and it has a highly useful focal range. A bit boring, but buying another may be the ticket.

The 70-200 should become the backup for the 70-200 II. Or a person could limp along with the primes if you add a 135 f2, but as a primary lens for shooting from the back of the venue, I imagine you'll want the zoom option.

It's fun spending other people's money! So a 24-105, a 70-200 II, a 135 f2, and just because we like you so much, add a 300mm f2.8 to the list for when 200mm just isn't enough.
iowa_jim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2011, 9:42 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iowa_jim View Post
It's fun spending other people's money!
True that.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 5:59 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
iowa_jim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Central Iowa
Posts: 589
Default

What's the answer to the riddle?
iowa_jim is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:13 AM.