johnctharp Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
jstens wrote:
Now what glass to get along with it..... don't have much that will transfer over as most of my currents are EF-S. Looking at f/4 17-70 L, f/4 24-105, f/4 70-200 IS, 100 L Macro. Want at least two of those and def want 100 L. Thinking about the 17-70 or 24-105 along with the 100 and hold off on the 70-200?
If you have no UWA, standard zoom, telezoom, or macro for full-frame, it's relatively hard to claim that you're 'invested' in Canon glass. You aren't; you're invested in Canon *APS-C* glass that will not carry over. Further, be careful about each of these lenses and their uses.
The 100L, for example, is no replacement for a fast short telezoom (i.e. 70-200 of any type). The focus speed isn't there. The lens is expensive to be used as a portrait prime, as most believe that the lens will do double duty for (it will) next to the capable 85/1.8 and 100/2 lenses that both focus faster and have fewer aberrations (various types of CA as well as vignetting) at f/2.8 while challenging the 100L's sharpness. The 100L's strength, that justifies it's price over most any other 1:1 macro lens, is its image stabilization. And while that's great, note that it's mostly useful for closeups. For most telephoto work you'll want the shutter speed to be high enough to stop subject movement that you'll be obviating the need for IS, and at near 1:1 no IS will be enough, and a tripod will be called for (or a *lot* of light). Unless you fit that 'closeup' criteria *and* the 24-70/4L IS Macro doesn't fit your closeup needs, the 100L is a very fine waste of money.
And so on.
|