Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
  

Archive 2012 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)
  
 
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


**in the face of my 1st world "dilemma" to follow I'd just like to say what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary earlier is a shocking tragedy and my thoughts are with the families affected. I also hope none of the FM forum members have been affected.**

I've been pondering over selling three of my "short" lenses (35L, 16-35 ii and 24-105) and replacing with the 24-70 ii, mainly for use on my 5Dmk3. I know each of those 3 lenses bring different attributes to the party, but here's my reasoning:

35L - Its a great lens, but I hardly ever use it. For me 35mm is a bit of a nowhere prime F/L. I don't find it long enough for what I may use it for which is mainly as a walk around lens. I also don't usually shoot wider/faster than f/2 so using the 24-70 @f/2.8, I'd only lose a stop and it can do 35mm if or when required for composition. Bokeh is a minor consideration in the equation, just to get that out of the way.

16-35 ii - at 16mm even stopped down the corners are noticeably softer than the centre and middle, so I don't often use it wider than 20mm, even for landscapes. On a 1Dmk4 it offers a more useful FOV as a walk around lens IMO, especially at the longer end, but the 1Dmk4 is not as common looking as a 5D shaped body so I don't use it on the street much.

24-105 - Its a good lens, we all know what it does, and its short comings, but F/2.8 it can't do and the 24-70 ii is obviously optically superior.

A further consideration is, I can't afford the 24-70 unless I sell those three lenses. The Tamron VR may be an option at half the price, but while very decent it doesn't quite match the IQ of the Canon so I'm probably going to rule it out.

For those of you who have had wider than 24mm and then sold that lens have you missed the extra 6mm, or have you just adapted and carried on with no regrets? In my mind I'm picturing the 24-70 ii as an excellent all round package for landscapes, walk around, and portraits. I'm pretty sure I won't miss the 35L. Am I on solid ground thinking this way or just being silly?

Edited on Dec 14, 2012 at 11:27 PM · View previous versions



Dec 14, 2012 at 11:22 PM
cputeq
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


Are you able to borrow or rent a 24-70 for a few days to give it a go? Seems like you've rationalized it rather well, though I'm not so sure I could live with 24mm as my widest focal.



Dec 14, 2012 at 11:25 PM
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


cputeq wrote:
Are you able to borrow or rent a 24-70 for a few days to give it a go? Seems like you've rationalized it rather well, though I'm not so sure I could live with 24mm as my widest focal.


I have a friend with one but I'm not entirely sure she'd lend it to me! renting is probably the way forward as far as testing goes



Dec 14, 2012 at 11:30 PM
AGeoJO
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


Stuart,
I understand your situation entirely. My 35mm f/1.4 was great and I had it for awhile but focal length-wise it was not one of my most used lenses. So, before I received my 24-70mm Mark II, I sold that lens already. I will be selling my 24-105mm next although I really like the IS part of that lens and of course, the more extended range but after the first shots taken with the Mark II, I am ready to sell that lens, too. I also have a 16-35mm Mark II and mine is actually a great performer. I don't think I am ready to sell it yet. So, in my case I replaced two lenses with a single one and what a great performer the replacement lens is!

I am not sure whether you have seen this thread or not: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1157088/0.

Joshua



Dec 14, 2012 at 11:59 PM
firstgear99
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


I have the 28-70 f2.8 as well as the 24-105, 16-35 and the 28-300, all L lenses.

The least used of that group is the 28-70. It just doesn't have the reach I want when we travel. And we travel someplace every month usually going to Europe 2 to 3 times a year plus trips across the US.

I haven't taken it with me in the past 3 years.....

The most widely used travel lens for me is the 28-300 f3.5/4.5. Big and heavy, but I only have to carry that one lens.

If I know we are going castle hunting in Europe, I will take the 16-35 with me for inside the castle where the lens speed and wide angle helps immensely.


I wouldn't get rid of the longer reach lens just yet.



Dec 15, 2012 at 03:17 AM
robbymack
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


This sort of begs the question, what do you shoot? I recently upgraded my canon 24-70 I to the new tamron which is now my new "Precious". The canon 24-70 ii just wasn't worth the extra $1000 in my opinion when I could get everything I wanted in the tamron (sharper than my version I and with IS). Sure the new canon is a tad bit sharper, but not twice as sharp as the price should suggest, and the IS just seals it. I can shoot hand held at 1/15 sec at 70mm if necessary (hopefully it never comes to that). It's so good that I'm renting the new tamron 70-200 in a few weeks for a friends wedding just to see if it can hold a candle to the canon.

Dude the sandy hook thing is just tragic, hug your little ones a little tighter tonight! My cousin and her three small ones live in the next town over from them they are all shaken pretty hard.



Dec 15, 2012 at 03:48 AM
StillFingerz
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


Take an inventory of your images; filters in Lightroom can help with this. Look at the percentage each lens is used or at focal lengths most used. Then look at the outer edges of the above sweet spot and determine if you can do without the extremes; ultra wide or short tele.

If 24-70 will let you get most of what you need, go with it...you can always pick up something wider/longer later on if needed or rent one for a given event/project.

Seems to me you could sell the 35L, 24-105, add a bit of cash, get the 24-70 II and keep the 16-35 II...my math could be off tho.

Personally I like teles for landscapes also and if I could afford f2.8L glass I'd pack the 16-35 II and 70-200 II and be quite happy...with one fast non-L prime, like the 50 f1.4.



Dec 15, 2012 at 03:55 AM
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


AGeoJO wrote:
Stuart,
I understand your situation entirely. My 35mm f/1.4 was great and I had it for awhile but focal length-wise it was not one of my most used lenses. So, before I received my 24-70mm Mark II, I sold that lens already. I will be selling my 24-105mm next although I really like the IS part of that lens and of course, the more extended range but after the first shots taken with the Mark II, I am ready to sell that lens, too. I also have a 16-35mm Mark II and mine is actually a great performer. I don't think
...Show more

Hi Joshua, yes I saw that thread and I was mighty impressed with many of the images posted, especially your "Sunrise at Mesa Arch" I think that thread needs a bump with more great images added. I do like the IS of the 24-105. It allows me to shoot at 1/10th or a little better. Again I agree that the 16-35 ii is a great performer. Mine is very sharp, except in the corners, which I think is par for the course with most WA lenses.I had a 17-40, but got fed up with it, because it was very "spongey" on the left while being pretty good on the right. I replaced it with the 16-35 ii. What I'm really looking for is an all-in-one solution. The compromises are very apparent though, but the gains are also great. I have a great aversion to swapping out lenses when I'm out. Dust is my enemy



Dec 15, 2012 at 09:18 AM
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


firstgear99 wrote:
I have the 28-70 f2.8 as well as the 24-105, 16-35 and the 28-300, all L lenses.

The least used of that group is the 28-70. It just doesn't have the reach I want when we travel. And we travel someplace every month usually going to Europe 2 to 3 times a year plus trips across the US.

I haven't taken it with me in the past 3 years.....

The most widely used travel lens for me is the 28-300 f3.5/4.5. Big and heavy, but I only have to carry that one lens.

If I know we are going castle hunting in Europe, I
...Show more

Time to sell that 28-70 That 28-300 is certainly a big chunk of glass to carry 99% of the time! When traveling I have tended to take just the 24-105, which has done the job for me. It's kind of all lenses sell or none sell. I kind of need to sell all the lenses to cover the cost of the 24-70ii. I don't think I'm any closer to deciding now!



Dec 15, 2012 at 09:23 AM
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


robbymack wrote:
This sort of begs the question, what do you shoot? I recently upgraded my canon 24-70 I to the new tamron which is now my new "Precious". The canon 24-70 ii just wasn't worth the extra $1000 in my opinion when I could get everything I wanted in the tamron (sharper than my version I and with IS). Sure the new canon is a tad bit sharper, but not twice as sharp as the price should suggest, and the IS just seals it. I can shoot hand held at 1/15 sec at 70mm if necessary (hopefully it never comes to
...Show more

Horrible horrible situation. I always think if some person is going to take their own life, can't they just do it somewhere quiet and leave everyone else out of it, especially young kids. Horrific thing to do

I'm glad you have added the Tamron into the mix and I have been considering it, but always erring towards the Canon. A friend is going to test one on a 6D for me and send me the RAW files for me to pixel peep. Being that he is a pro wedding photog (shoots Nikon though), I'll also get his opinion on the IQ. I have seen many very positive reviews and that VR system is a huge bonus. Samples crops and MTF charts show the Tamron to be somewhat sharper than the 24-105 and fall somewhere between the old and new versions. Does seem right to you from what you've experienced? Also the Canon is very wide open. How are you finding the Tamron to be at f/2.8? cheers


Edited on Dec 15, 2012 at 09:46 AM · View previous versions



Dec 15, 2012 at 09:31 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


StillFingerz wrote:
Take an inventory of your images; filters in Lightroom can help with this. Look at the percentage each lens is used or at focal lengths most used. Then look at the outer edges of the above sweet spot and determine if you can do without the extremes; ultra wide or short tele.

If 24-70 will let you get most of what you need, go with it...you can always pick up something wider/longer later on if needed or rent one for a given event/project.

Seems to me you could sell the 35L, 24-105, add a bit of cash, get the 24-70
...Show more

I'm going to do just what you advise, LR is is updating to 4.3 as I type and then I'm on it I had a 50 1.4 previously but the focus was so off. I used it for a wedding and after a few shots I realized it was all over the place so I packed it away and resorted to using the 24-105 and 580 ex. The 50 1.4 went back and I paid a lot more money for the 35L. Maybe I should look at the Sigma 50... I do sometimes use my 70-200 for landscapes, even with extenders. Great for isolating the best bits



Dec 15, 2012 at 09:39 AM
Monito
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


The 16-35 Mark II is a great lens. I'd sell the other two and save up the money difference to get the 24-70 Mark II. It is actually useful to have a little overlap in zooms.



Dec 15, 2012 at 11:29 AM
justruss
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


I'll go with some general advice (because I LOVE 35mm fl, and that's nearly all I shoot): Drop the lenses you don't use, you can always buy them back used. Consider carry weight and size when it comes to use. If you're wondering if a lens does it for you, rent it for a week or two. It's usually pretty cheap, and it'll let you know if you can take the plunge and shuffle up your kit.

Oh, and new lenses can sometimes re-invigorate the fire to shoot.



Dec 15, 2012 at 11:46 AM
robbymack
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


Bones74 wrote:
Horrible horrible situation. I always think if some person is going to take their own life, can't they just do it somewhere quiet and leave everyone else out of it, especially young kids. Horrific thing to do

I'm glad you have added the Tamron into the mix and I have been considering it, but always erring towards the Canon. A friend is going to test one on a 6D for me and send me the RAW files for me to pixel peep. Being that he is a pro wedding photog (shoots Nikon though), I'll also get his opinion on the
...Show more


The Tammy is just as good wide open, sure its softer than the canon, but every zoom in the range ever made is including the old version of the lens which until about 4 months ago was perfectly fine for most. The question should be what are your needs and what do you shoot? If you demand pixel level sharpness across the range it's easy, buy the canon and keep shooting test charts all day to make yourself feel better. If instead you're like me and dont have red line envy, think a little softness wide open is to be expected, think IS is a good thing, and you like the feel of an extra $1000 in your pocket then it's clearly the tamron. My only complaint with the tamron is that the zoom turns the wrong way, a minor inconvenience, but annoying anyway. Oh and aperture 3 doesn't recognize it as the tamron, it shows up as the sigma 24-70, but that is of little concern to me.



Dec 15, 2012 at 02:10 PM
Snopchenko
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


Keep the 16-35 and add the Tamron 24-70 VC. You'll have a two lens set with best of all worlds (16mm wide in the 16-35 - I really doubt that 24mm is wide enough for most purposes, pretty much nobody I know is ever satisfied with that, and inevitably they all end up with something wider - even on FF), and a f/2.8 stabilized lens. Fail that, you may sell the 16-35 as well and go for something even wider like the Sigma 12-24.


Dec 15, 2012 at 02:23 PM
firstgear99
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


Bones74 wrote:
Time to sell that 28-70 That 28-300 is certainly a big chunk of glass to carry 99% of the time! When traveling I have tended to take just the 24-105, which has done the job for me. It's kind of all lenses sell or none sell. I kind of need to sell all the lenses to cover the cost of the 24-70ii. I don't think I'm any closer to deciding now!


Yes, it is a big hunk of glass to carry. I usually walk with the camera + wrist strap hanging on my hand.....after a while of doing this your forearm no longer aches and it is just fine....but you have to get through that part.

I have thought about selling the 28-70, but I am thinking of giving it to my daughter. I had a 17-35L and the 70-200f2.8 that I have given her as I upgraded. Probably time to give her the 28-70.



Dec 15, 2012 at 02:36 PM
ben egbert
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


Monito wrote:
The 16-35 Mark II is a great lens. I'd sell the other two and save up the money difference to get the 24-70 Mark II. It is actually useful to have a little overlap in zooms.


+1.

I recently sold lots of primes including the 24TSE and 35L with a Zeiss 50 up for sale. This after getting the 24-70 mk2. A great lens. But I really needed the 16-24 range so I bought a 16-35. Had to send it to Canon for AF cal, but now it is doing pretty well. Yes, the corners are soft, but even my 17 and 24TSE was slightly soft in the corner. By f11, it is usable and pretty good elsewhere.

16-35, 24-70 and 70-200 covers the range with three lenses.



Dec 15, 2012 at 02:48 PM
ManWearPants
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


If you are just going to have one lens, then by all means get the 24-70. However, the 16-35/2.8 + 70-200/2.8 IS II would be a more useful 2 lenses kit. IMO, 24mm just isn't wide enough and 70mm not long enough. If weight is an issue, the f4 IS is just as wonderful a lens.


Dec 15, 2012 at 04:01 PM
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


ManWearPants wrote:
If you are just going to have one lens, then by all means get the 24-70. However, the 16-35/2.8 + 70-200/2.8 IS II would be a more useful 2 lenses kit. IMO, 24mm just isn't wide enough and 70mm not long enough. If weight is an issue, the f4 IS is just as wonderful a lens.


Hi there. Weight is no issue at all I cant disagree, 24mm isn't wide enough so I am going to keep the 16-35 ii. The 35L has been advertised and hopefully I'll be able to sell it soon. I still cant make up my mind whether it's worth forking out for the 24-70 ii or go for the Tamron. A friend of mine is sending me some sample RAW files from the Tamron soon so I'll have a chance to evaluate. cheers



Dec 15, 2012 at 06:14 PM
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · Sell three lenses and replace with one? Thoughts please :)


Thanks for all the replies guys, much appreciated. I have been convinced to keep the 16-35 ii As mentioned above, the 35L is now up for sale. Photozone's test of the Tamron shows it to very sharp in the centre wide open and its MTF chart backs this up. Being able to shoot it wide open is very important. Add the VC system and its a very appealing lens, especially for 1/2 the price of the Canon.


Dec 15, 2012 at 06:25 PM
1
       2       3       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password