Picha Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Sell my L Zooms for L Primes and Other Assorted Questions? | |
Vermiculations wrote:
Hi,
I'm just getting back into shooting after a few years away (digital and film) and have lots of questions.
Looking back on my previous experience the bulk and weight of my zooms was always a barrier to shooting. I am strongly considering selling my zooms and purchasing 3-4 high quality primes for a versatile, minimalist kit.
Most of my current shooting will be outdoors. A combination of landscape and action photos in somewhat remote locations. With a good portion of this shooting done at dusk.
I plan on upgrading my camera body to a 6D - lighter, less bulk, and strong performance in low light make this sound like the best choice. Though I still have questions about the video performance and AF of this camera. Positive or cautionary comments appreciated.
The 5D MK3 is my other option, but likely eliminates a lens purchase.
My current lenses are the: Canon 28-70 2.8L and the canon 70-200 2.8L.
The vast majority of my use with the 70-200 was roughly at 135 (2/3 extended) and fully extended at 200. It seems fairly obvious to replace this lens with the 135 2L and 200 2.8L II. Both primes have stellar reputations are lighter and less bulky.
My use of the 28-70 was restricted to the wider angles of the lens, with shots over 50 almost never occuring and I often remember wanting to go slightly wider. For that reason, I would like to replace this lens with 1-2 wide primes or possibly the 16-35 2.8L II.
Any comments in favor of the 16-35?
I am considering these primes in order: 35 1.4L, 24 1.4L II, TS-E 24 3.5L.
I'm very tempted to try 35, 135, 200 and fill in later.
However, I am concerned that the 35 might not be wide enough. Nor am I sure I could justify owning both the 24 and 35.
Comments on low light AF performance of the 24 and 35 welcome. Particularly if you have a 6D body.
I like the images I have seen produced with the TS-E lenses, but they are very expensive. How difficult is it to master their use?
Will the gap between 35 and 135 be an issue?
I was originally thinking about adding a 50 or 85 L but have all but ruled these lenses out based on my past usage and serious concerns about their AF performance - particularly in low light situations. Can any 6D owners comment how these lenses work with the 6D body?
Am I on the right track or am I crazy to sell off my zooms?
...Show more →
No, you are not crazy :-) Using primes does limit you regarding focal lenghts to choose from BUT doesn't limit your quality of photography !
I would ditch the 24-70, as someone described it as being "boring", I kinda agree.
In combination with the 70-200 it does give you full coverage from 24 -200 ( and therefore it's been a common combination) but people often use it at the very end ... at 70 or 24.
And that's the "only" advantage you have, being able to use either focal length without switching lenses. For a wedding photographer quiet handy ...
But then I would prefer to work with two bodies, one with a 70-200 and the other with a 24 or 35 prime.
For me, I would keep anyway a 70-200. Which one ... ?
Ask yourselve, do you need f2.8 ? If not, I'd go for the 70-200 f4 IS. Small, light AND sharp wide open.
You need f2.8 ... I'd go for the IS version, preferable the MarkII
Prime Wide angle ... you wonder if 35mm is wide enough !?
Best advice regarding this (and won't cost you a thing) ..."select" 35mm on your 28-70 and see for yourselve ! Not just for a single shot but for a day !
You find 28mm even "narrow" !? There's your answer ... 24 !
The 35L is a great lens, makes your images "pop" on a full frame and fast glass is always "yummy" :-)
Mine is very usuable at f1.4 and off course it only get's better at f2.8 ...
I don't own the 24LII but I am pretty sure it's at the same level as the 35L.
I did own the 135L, great fast lens but I wish it had IS because shooting at 1/60/sec or slower wasn't that obvious and the 70-200 2.8 IS Mark I at that time did deliver at 1/30th ( 1 stop slower tough but love the Bokeh at f2.8 200mm just as much as the 135 f2).
I had a 17-35, which had too much distortion at the edges ( bad sample) and the 35L spoiled me so I sold it very fast !
No need for f2.8 ... I'd consider 17-40 f4.
24 T/S MarkII needs time to master, you can't just use it to replace a 24L/35L since it's manual and not as fast (f3.5) but it's a high quality lens and will challenge you. AND will keep you busy being creative, so it's a great lens to have aside a "normal" wide angle.
I have no experience of using a 6D. Full frame is anyway the way I'd go.
If you don't need/want the 5DIII features ... 6D seems more then fine.
So, I'd make the choice between a 24L OR a 35L ( instead of buying both, I'd invest in the 70-200 2.8 II)
Being able to use high ISO is NOT the same as using fast glass !
Rgds
|