Best all purpose lens for Canon 6D

<p>I am about to buy a 6D with a 24-105 f4L lens. I already own a Canon 100mm f2.8 macro and a Canon 100-400mm zoom. I sometimes find myself in a situation where I cannot switch lenses and I am looking for a "one size fits all" lens for these infrequent situations. I am leaning toward the Tamron 28-300 VC. The price is reasonable and for a lens I will not use often and the reviews seem quite good for a 10x zoom. Does anyone have any alternative suggestions I should consider?</p>

<p>Note: At four times the price, three times the weight and two times the length the Canon 28-300mm is not an option. Thanks for any suggestions or comments.<br>

Bill</p>

<p>IMO, the 24-105mm <strong><em>is</em></strong> the "best all-purpose lens" for the camera, especially when combined with the 100-400mm and the macro.</p>

<p>I accept compromises are necessary, but the wide angle to 300mm compromises are more than I personally would accept. When you don't want to switch, assess the situation and leave either the 24-105 or the 100-400 on the camera for the shoot.<br>

All you need is a ultrawide lens and you're set for broad-view, bear, or bug.</p>

<p>Thanks JDM. You got me to look at this in a different way. I already have a 60D which I will keep until I upgrade it to a 7D or the much rumored 7D Mark II. For a little more money I could get a 70-200 f4L IS and have that on the 60D with the 24-105 on the 6D. That would give me nearly continuous coverage from 24mm to 320mm (adjusting for the crop factor) with much higher image quality. I would have to carry both bodies but in most situations that would not be a serious problem. Something to think about.</p>

<p>I recently bought a 50D to use with my 100-400mm, while I carry my 5Dii with the 24-105mm and find those together to be a very nice package. I originally looked at the 7D, but it was more than I personally needed and 2.5X more expensive.</p>

<p>It makes a huge difference on the 100-400mm "totability" if you get one of the Black Rapid (or clone) straps( http://digital-photography-school.com/black-rapid-rs-7-camera-strap-review ). It's almost like not carrying the huge rig.<br /> You might even find that the 70-200 wouldn't really be necessary.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I sometimes find myself in a situation where I cannot switch lenses.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As you have already mentioned those times are quite few. And in my experience those times are very VERY rarely coincident with not being able / allowed to carry two cameras and two lenses.</p>

<p>***</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I already have a 60D which I will keep until I upgrade it to a 7D or the much rumored 7D Mark II. For a little more money I could get a 70-200 f4L IS and have that on the 60D with the 24-105 on the 6D.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A much more, all round elegant choice. IMO.</p>

<p>But - as you brought up the point up of weight, I’ll comment that I think the weight of those TWO cameras and TWO lenses will be about 30% more than the 6D with the 28 to 300L.</p>

<p>***</p>

<p>I realize that you stated the Canon L is out of the equation, but:<br>

I haven’t used the Tamron lens. I have used the Canon35 to 350L (predecessor to the 28 to 300L): this use was out of necessity, where changing lenses was impossible and also a second camera was impossible.<br>

The 35 to 350L was a very good lens for what it has to do: by all reports the 28 to 300 is exceptional for what it has to do and the IS is a much warranted addition. <br>

Although I have not used the Tamron lens – if I were again in a position that I required only one lens and that requirement was only on the odd occasion I would rent the 28 to 300L IS in an heartbeat, not even considering the Tamron.<br>

These “odd occasions” are when renting is ideal, IMO. </p>

<p>WW</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I could get a 70-200 f4L IS and have that on the 60D with the 24-105 on the 6D.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Excellent idea!</p>

<blockquote>I sometimes find myself in a situation where I cannot switch lenses and I am looking for a "one size fits all" lens for these infrequent situations. I am leaning toward the Tamron 28-300 VC.</blockquote>

<p>If this is the case, then a better choice may be a Tamron 18-270/3.5-6.3 VC PZD. Of course this doesn't have quite the IQ of either the 24-105 or the 70-200/4, but that combination is quite limiting in it's max FOV of 35mm, and also limits your long end. You of course have to pick the 'best for you', but that Dolphin that buzzes you while riding across the river on a ferry isn't going to wait for you to open the bag, switch lenses, and resume shooting. So when in an unpredictable shooting environment, you <em>literally</em> can be taking pictures of your kids on the seat, enjoying the ride one second, see them start to point, turn around and capture tight, very good, imagery of that swooping helicopter the next second. BTDT, and I had the 24-70 & the 70-200/2.8 in the bag at the time.<br>

It really comes down to a) a 'one lens that covers everything' or b) a series of lenses that cover everything you need. You don't get to keep your cake and eat it too, unless you are willing to pay for all of the above, but even then, when you don't have time (or freedom) to mount/dismount lenses, all of them, except the one that's mounted, are useless hunks of glass, metal, plastic, and electronics. </p>

<p>But to me, the biggest benefit to an 'all-in-one' was that I <em>did not need to carry around a camera bag </em>all the time, I could simply carry the camera. At the time it was on a 50D, and beign able to selectively frame my shots w/o lens hijinks made it easier to carry all the time, and when shooting casually, it allowed me to always be prepared - many of those shots would have simply been impossible to predict (and therefore capture) without an all in one.</p>

<p>I had the 24-105L as my all-rounder when I first got my FF. Loved it to bits. Amazingly versatile, very well built and great optically. Sadly, it got stolen. I currently have a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 which has proved very useful for close-ups of rings and such. I miss the width and the extra focal length on the 24-105, so I know I will eventually supplement my Tammy with another 24-105L.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If this is the case, then a better choice may be a Tamron 18-270/3.5-6.3 VC PZD</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Marcus, I understood the OP to mean that he wanted to use this "one size fits all" lens on the 6D.<br>

Although this Tamron is an EF mount - it will vignette on a 6D.</p>

<p>Did you mean for this lens to be used on the OP's (existing) 60D?</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>Thanks for your thoughtful comments. Since no one proposed an alternative to the Tamron 28-300mm that will be my choice if I decide to buy an all-in-one.<br>

<br />Bill</p>

<p>There is no such thing as a "Best all purpose lens for Canon 6D" regardless of what anyone recommends to you. It's like asking if there is a best all purpose camera. There isn't.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I am about to buy a 6D with a 24-105 f4L lens.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Bill, If you don't think the 24-105MM (I own it and love it) will meet your needs, <em>why not buy the 6D without it?</em><br>

<br>

Also , consider that the lens you call and "all-in-one" will overlap most of the range you already have in the 24-105.<br>

<br>

Be aware that contrast, sharpness and color from the 24-105L will likely be <em>much</em> better that lower quality lenses. <br>

<br>

A 100-300 zoom would be a wiser "addition" to the 24-105MM IMHO.</p>

<p>Ok guys, I have placed my order. Here is the final decision.<br>

I have ordered: 6D, 24-105 f4L, 17-40 f4L.<br>

Combined with my existing 100-400 f3.5-5.6L will give continuous coverage from 17mm to 400mm on the 6D using high quality lenses. For those rare instances where I can't change lenses I'll use the 6D with the 24-105 and my 60D with either the 100-400 or, if I want less weight or don't want the gap between 105mm on the 6D and the effective 160mm on the 60D, I'll use my 55-250mm on the 60D. Using the 55-250 on the crop sensor body will give me continuous coverage from 24mm on the 6D to 400mm (effective) on the 60D without having to change lenses.<br>

If Canon announces the the 7D Mark II by the end of summer I will take a look at that, otherwise I will buy a 7D body to replace the 60D. I have been very happy with the 60D but when I bought it I did not anticipate photographing any fast action. Since then I have gotten into aviation photography and rodeo photography and the 60D's autofocus system has not been adequate.<br>

Thanks to all of you for helping me think clearly about my needs and options. I think this decision will give me good results in 99.95% of the situations I will find myself in.<br>

Bill</p>

<p>You've already got the classic lenses that you need, assuming the purchase of the 24-105mm as part of a kit.</p>

<p>Considering ANY zoom lens, you have to ask if DLO (digital lens optimization) is available for you lens/body combination. It will be for all the Canons and makes a huge difference in the finished product when you use it in the Raw conversion process. DLO may be available for the Tamron/Canon combination, but it probably won't work as well as Canon's own DLO, which comes withe camera.</p>

<p>DLO adjusts for geometric distortion, CA, vignetting, etc. at every focal length and every aperture of the lens. Any zoom, particularly one going from wide to telephoto, is going to have serious distortion without correction.</p>

<p>Also, you're buying a full-frame body, so get away from the super-zoom mentality and look for the best IQ. To get around the switching lens issue, carry a second body, if it's a regular enough issue. I shoot wildlife and birds and carry a 500mm on my 5D MkIII and a 70-200mm on my 7D. Of course, there's a 24-105mm in my vest pocket, along with 1.4X and 2.0X TCs. Really, you can make a fast switch with two bodies, but even then you'll need to swap lenses occasionally.</p>

<p>I think you are making an excellent choice in the Tamron 28-300 VC. I have used may Tsamron's the 17-50, 28-75 and now my goto lens is my Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC and 70-300 F4-5.6 VC which I absolutely love. I purchased and returned the Canon 24-105 F4 IS. I absolutely did not like lens. The distortion of horizontal lines and vignetting at 24mm was unacceptable, especially when compared to the excellence of the Canon 17-40 F4L. <br>

But, back on topic for a small versatile lens with VC I don't think you can beat Tamrons 28-300. There VC system is absolutely incredible and the price is right. </p>

<p>24-105L is tough to beat.<br>

Best analogy I can think of was an old "Logger" in Oregon that I offered a drink of whiskey out of a bottle.<br>

I asked him how was the whiskey and he answered "just right"....I asked him to define "just right" and he said "well it's "just right" because if it was any worse I couldn't have drank it and if it was any better you wouldn't have offered it to me so it's "just right".............to me the 24-105 fits that description to a "T".</p>