Total realignment of my body/lens quiver?

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by aaron_p., May 10, 2016.

  1. Background:
    I've been shooting EOS since 1997 when I switched over from FD. I went digital in 2005. Shooting moved from portraiture and food to skiing, landscapes, travel, and backpacking. My wife and I acquired quite the setup and lens quiver. But we've been so busy the last 3 years. I realized I need to reduce the quiver of lenses, and maybe realign things. Here is what I have:
    5D Mk1
    Tokina 10-17mm Fisheye
    EFS 10-22mm 3.5-4.5 USM
    EFS 17-55mm 2.8 IS USM
    Sigma 18-125mm 3.5-5.6 OS HSM
    Sigma 18-200mm 3.5-6.3 OS
    Sigma 50-150mm 2.8 EX HSM Mk2
    EF 70-200mm 2.8 L USM
    EF 70-300mm 4-5.6 IS USM
    Sigma 24mm 1.8 EX
    Canon 50mm 1.8 Mk1
    Canon 50mm 1.4 USM
    Sigma 105mm 2.8 EX 1:1 Macro
    Sigma 1.4x
    Sigma 2x APO EX
    Now our photography is mostly travel and landscapes with some skiing and astrophotography. I wanted to simplify, so I was thinking of selling most everything and end up with a simple quiver like my 5 lens setup back when I had my EOS 3 in 2004.

    Body: 6D - seems perfect for everything except am I going to regret dropping down to 4.5fps?
    Wide Angle/Zoom: Sigma 24mm 1.8 EX or return to a EF 16/17-35mm 2.8 L USM?
    Primary: EF 24-105mm 4 L IS USM ... f/4 is slow... or I could get the Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 IS USM? But then would I need a 28-300 as a walk around?
    Tele Zoom: 70-200 2.8 L USM or do I surrender to the amazing usefulness of IS and upgrade to f/2.8 IS or the much lighter and easier to travel with f/4 IS?
    Fast: EF 50mm 1.4 USM (I'll cry when I sell the 1.8 Mk1, what a gem)
    Macro: Sigma 105mm 2.8 EX or upgrade to an EF (or Sigma) 100mm IF IS USM?
  2. W/A: I'd get the 16-35mm f4 IS. The 16-35mm f2.8 will probably be revamped soon.
    Primary: either choice is good. You might also want to consider the EF 24-70 f4 IS or 24-70 f2.8 IS: IQ is better.
    Telezoom: I'd get the 70-200 f4 IS in your shoes.
    Fast: You could get the 50/1.4, but I'm not sure I would bother. A new EF 50/1.4 is probably on the cards and the difference between the current f1.4 and the f1.8 is not all that great.
    Macro: I wouldn't change. The Sigma is very good and you have IS covered at 100mm with the 70-200 f4IS.
    You won't regret the fps on the 6D.
  3. My kit is the 5DsR with the 24-105mm f/4L IS, the 70-200mm f/4L IS and the 14mm f/2.8L II. (I also have the 500/f4-II, with a 7D2, but you don't need that). However, I would add an EF 1.4x TC-III to your bag and an ET25 to use the 70-200mm as a macro at times. (I'm not sure of your usage, so I don't know if you need a dedicated macro, but you'll know). (A 70-200mm with a 1.4x or 2.0x TC and an ET25 gives very good magnification).
    I don't feel your need for a fast 50mm, but I understand, so, for you, I'd keep the one that you prefer, based on usage.
    High ISO performance has improved enough that you only need faster than f/4 for artistic preference, not IQ.
  4. Now our photography is mostly travel and landscapes with some skiing and astrophotography.
    6D - seems perfect for everything except am I going to regret dropping down to 4.5fps?​

    For those purposes, a relatively simple kit is all that is required. The largest gaping hole in your lineup is a 24-70/24-105, as it appears you have no good quality wide-mid zoom. This is something that is very helpful in travel, and landscapes. While some might argue that an UWA zoom is more helpful, unfortunately none on the market often a tight enough zoom to be able to isolate subjects, or areas of interest, at will - especially when (as frequently occurs during travel) you don't have specific control of your shooting location relative to your subject.

    Were you to drop crop, and go all FF, this is a serious expenditure to consider. a 5 lens kit could consist of the following:
    ... (UWA - say, as suggested, a 16/17-35)
    ... (wide-mid zoom 24-105/4 or 24-70/2.8 or 4 IS)
    70-200/2.8 L (w/ Sigma 2x TC)
    50/1.4 USM
    105/2.8 Macro

    Frankly, It might be a better choice, given what you've already got in your quiver to upgrade to a 70/80D, leave the 5D at home, and then you have no giant gaping holes in coverage w/ :
    EFS 10-22mm 3.5-4.5 USM
    EFS 17-55mm 2.8 IS USM
    EF 70-300mm 4-5.6 IS USM
    (EF 70-200/2.8L + 2x TC gives better range, but at the cost of IQ (when used w/ the 2x) and IS (all the time) and weight.)
    Canon 50mm 1.4 USM
    Sigma 105mm 2.8 EX 1:1 Macro
    No lens purchases would be required.

    Doing so would accomplish ALL your objectives, and do so at a minimal cost. Not to mention the newer AF systems in the 70/80D will put those in the 40D/5D1/6D to shame when you see a fleeing skier... In your shoes, I'd probably happily go with option number 2
  5. Use a solid tripod and lens quiver be gone! ;-)
  6. Very good, PF :)
    Only you can decide what fps you need from your camera body. I would just say that having had the 5D and 5DII, for my purposes the 6D is an excellent camera.
    I agree with the suggestion of the 16-35 f4 L IS as it has very good sharpness over the whole frame.
    My kit which I use primarily for travel, landscape, wildlife is 6D, 16-35 f4 L, 24-105 f4L, 100 f2.8 L Macro, 70-300 f4.5-5.6 L, 100-400 f4.5-5.6 L, 50 1.8. I usually select 2 or 3 lenses from these to suit whatever subject I am shooting that day.
  7. I think the costs of going FF would be covered by selling all those lenses I wouldn't need anymore. On the other hand, MI's 80D option ends up with money in my pocket.
    1998-2005 my setup was this:
    EOS 3 + Elan IIe
    EF 17-35 2.8 L
    EF 50 1.4
    EF 70-200 2.8 L
    Sigma 105 Macro
    It worked great except I had to change lenses constantly due to the lack of a standard zoom. I loved 2.8 L lenses (of course there were few IS lenses then). I loved the EOS-3. When I went to the 20D in 05 was about the end of when I was making money from photography, even with my now unused 4x5 (which I am also going to sell now too *sniffle*) since then it is all for fun.
    I worry about losing f/2.8. If I go to FF and have all f/4 lenses, I'll have the same DoF as f/2.8 on my APS-C. I also worry about AF performance. If I get an 80D, don't all the fancy cross sensors need f/2.8? A 24MP Rebel T6S with it's rear control dial and the 7D's AF sensors starts looking attractive re size/weight if I stay with APS-C.
    On the other hand, 2.8 weighs a lot and costs a lot... and any day a lens is left behind because it is bulky or heavy... "The best lens is the one you use."
  8. He's already full-frame.
  9. Both FF and Crop, but not fully optimized to either...
  10. If Robin Hood was a photographer, he'd have a lens quiver too...
  11. It's possibly the skiing that would require faster shooting.
    My personal work is landscape and architectural mostly, so fps is not relevant to a high degree. I have stabilized for the last couple of years on a 5Dii and a 50D. I can't see anything soon that requires more than that.
    On the other hand, there is the unquestionable 'bling' value of having the biggest megapixels in your photo collective.... That siren call of 50+ MP! :)

    Re Robin Smith on Robin Hood:
    the answer for lens quiver is Image Stabilization, eh?
  12. Crop sensors have come a long way and the lenses are generally smaller and lighter. You also mention travel and skiing. So why not a 7DII (rugged, sealed, fast)? Sell some of the less used glass and older DSLR bodies and then re-evaluate. Otherwise a 70D or 80D.
    Or sell the older bodies and get a modern rebel (for travel and skiing - smaller and still pretty rugged). Keep the 10-22 and 17-55 (nice lenses) and a few others and sell the rest. Use that money to buy a 6D and find one good full frame prime for astro work.
    Another option would be go with a mirrorless (A72 series or A6300 series) which can use adapted glass. The initial benefit will not be size/weight reduction but rather not having to buy all new glass and then decide). On my A7rII, the 35L and 135L focus like they're still on old 5D2. I might buy a Sony Zeiss lens but have not felt the need yet. And the Canon diehard that I am - I just know they will one day have another hit like the 5D2 - and I will go back to their body (sorry Canon - just got tired of waiting - but love the glass and was really sad selling the old 5D2 friend!). Or maybe Canon will even announce a competitive crop mirror-less
    All that being said, the 6D is a great camera and at its price point now its hard to go wrong other than the big lens disruption it would initiate and the added weight of the FF glass.
  13. Brad Trostad, said:
    All that being said, the 6D is a great camera and at its price point now its hard to go wrong other than the big lens disruption it would initiate and the added weight of the FF glass.​
    What "lens disruption"? He's already shooting a 5D and has a basket of lenses to get rid of. If he buys a 24-105mm in a 6D "kit", he's set.
  14. Oops my bad, I thought the first 5 zooms and maybe one prime were for crop sensors and thus a switch to full frame would mean several to sell - which Aaron seems willing to do - sorry about that Aaron.
    For travel, I'd ditch the 70-200 2.8L non-IS in favor of the f4 version. I owned a F2.8L and it was so heavy it was gone just months later - I think that is part of the reason they are such a good deal used.
    I hate to love my EF-50mm f1.4. It has been repaired by Canon twice, same old problem as everyone else. If you are looking for a great quality / price / weight standard prime the 40mm f2.8 is awesome and excellent for travel. My niece now has mine and I will probably never get it back (nice problem to have).
    I can vouch for the Canon 100L macro - awesome lens and pretty decent price when refurbished. That and the 35L were my most used lenses on the 5D2. I usually use the 100L on the Sony A7rII for soccer pictures, works good enough for me in servo mode - and it was really sweet for that sort of thing on crop Rebel at 160mm equivalent.
    Whenever I travel, I always take the Rokinon 14mm f2.8. A bit heavy, but nothing beats the ultra wide angle option. That's another good price vs performance lens for a less common but fun focal length. If you were to stick with crop the equivalent is a bit smaller and lighter.
    Another thing to ponder, if you aren't in a big rush it does seem like the 5DIV is looming (maybe August/September). The 5D3 prices (used and new) should drop and maybe give you another FF option (and awesome camera!)

Share This Page