Upgrading my system, suggestions

[dinesh.godavarty]

<p>Hi Guys, I currently own a Canon 60D with the tamron 17-50mm that I use for landscape photos.</p>

<p>I am thinking of upgrading to the Canon 6D, with additional lenses. I have been getting more into night photography, so am thinking of the Rokinon lens (either the 14 f2.8 or 24 f1.4). Which lens would the gurus recommend? Do both have the same sharpness, coma aberration performance etc.?</p>

<p>Also, the second lens I was thinking of is the 16-35F4 L from Canon. This would be my primary landscape lens. Is this an overkill to buy this lens along with the any of the Rokinon's above? </p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

[ed_avis2]

<p>The Rokinon lenses are manual focus. Manually focusing at night is hard, unless you use Live View, but then you need a tripod. And if you have a tripod you may as well shoot at a smaller aperture like f/8. So I'm not certain that night time implies these particular lenses, although they may be fine lenses generally.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>For your stated usage, the 6D will be an excellent upgrade.</p>

<p>Realize that 24mm is actually pretty wide on a full-frame. If you're shooting night sky, then a fast lens will give you an advantage. For city lights and such, then f/4 is plenty fast enough. I'd start with the excellent 16-35/f4 to see if that doesn't meet your needs and consider a specialty lens only after you first outings to see if you have a hole in your lens kit.</p>

<p>Get a good tripod also, if you don't already have one. Remote release is also very useful. Shoot in Raw and use Digital Lens Optimization when you do your Raw conversion to automatically correct for geometric distortion, chromatic aberration, vignetting, etc. at every focal length and every aperture automatically. DLO is part Digital Photo Professional, which ships with all Canon DSLRs. If you're not already doing it, shooting in Raw and learning to convert and process will move your photography forward as much as a new camera.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>A bit does depend on what you mean exactly by "night [landscape] photography": I assume that 'landscape' has an implied meaning.</p>

<p>If you want night time sky (stars without movement), then it is best to get a very fast Prime, the EF24/1.4L MkII is probably the best.</p>

<p>If you want general night time landscape and with no necessity to arrest Subject Movement, then the EF 16 to 35 F/4 IS, is an excellent choice:<br>

<strong>Although:</strong> the 16 to 35 (when used on a 6D), neither has EQUIVALENCE in FOCAL LENGTHS nor the ZOOM COMPASS that your 17 to 50 Tamron Lens provides you on your 60D:<br>

> The 16 to 35 is much wider at 16mm on a 6D than 17mm of a 60D<br>

> The 16 to 35 has a compass of about x2 Zoom and the 17 to 50 has a compass of about x3 zoom.<br>

These two facts combined, leaves one quite short at the normal to telephoto focal length range. </p>

<p>So I reckon the first consideration is to ask yourself:<br>

> <strong><em>"How much have I been using the 22mm to 50mm Focal Length Range on my 17 to 50 Tamron Lens?"</em></strong><br>

and then the second question is:<br>

<strong><em>> "How often did I want and how often do I think I might want a FL equivalent wider than the 17mm when I was using my Tamron 17 to 50 Lens on my 60D?" </em></strong><br>

<strong><em><br /></em></strong>The food for thought being, that serious consideration of a Zoom Lens in the range of 24 to 70 would be in keeping with a 'straight line' upgrade from the 17 to 50 lens on your 60D. </p>

<p>My personal view is I would never buy either of the Rokinon Lenses. The reason is simple. Whilst it might seem to be a value for money purchase to buy one of those lenses for <strong>'night time photography'</strong> - I look at the whole spending money thing from another point of view - "how cumbersome, time consuming and irritating will these lenses be to me when I want to put these tools to other uses do other things?" </p>

<p>I have 5D Series Cameras and I have a 16 to 35 and also a 24 Prime (and also 24 to xx zooms), obviously others will prefer the convenience of a zoom - and you should seriously consider that point, especially as a first purchase, a Zoom Lens is more versatile in many, many factors.</p>

<p>However for my <em>'night time photography'</em> I've found that I use the 24/1.4 Prime much more than any zoom lens. The reason is because the 24/1.4 has such a fast lens speed (Maximum Aperture), that it affords me <strong>a much wider selection</strong> of Shutter Speed and ISO: for that I am prepared to sacrifice the convenience of a zoom lens. And I use the 24/1.4 for a lot of other duties also, because I do a lot of low light, available light Portraiture.</p>

<p>WW<br>

<strong><em> </em></strong><br>

<strong><em> </em></strong><br>

</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>Yes the 16-35 f4 IS is excellent. I would steer clear of Rokinon, it's not so much the manual focus, but also the manual aperture (although they are related as you can't focus very easily when the lens is stopped down to the taking aperture). I would check out the other 24/1.4s such as the Sigma or Canon version I or II, although the Canon is more expensive. How about the Tamron 35/1.8 with VR or the Canon 35/2 with IS? Both will give you plenty of light-gathering power and with the big advantage of image stabilization.</p>

[kerry_grim]

A 6D is an excellent choice of camera. Others will disagree, but for star photography 2.8 is fast enough, using ISO 1600 or 3200. If you are doing landscape photography with a tripod, even a slow lens will work. I do not see the need for a faster lens. I use a 24 2.8IS lens with a 6D for general photograph as the IS is very helpful. I also use a 17-40 and often carry both, but some situations I prefer the prime lens such as shooting wide open. However, if I could afford the 16-35 f4 IS I would get that as it is a better lens.

 

I would put the money into a good tripod before I would spend it on a fast 1.4 lens.

 

Light pollution is pretty bad here is SE Pennsylvania. As was mentioned, 24 is pretty wide, but for stars, it is not. I would consider a 14mm lens if I lived or traveled to a place with very dark skies, but I would be hesitant to by a Rokinon. Unfortunately even used Canon 14s are expensive if you can even find one. I think 35mm is generally too much for stars.

[William Michael]

<p>The point about my mentioning a very fast Prime being effective for Stars, was the included qualifier <strong>'stars without movement'</strong>. Once one establishes the Shutter Speed Limit required to arrest the Star's Movement (and that will depend on various factors) the (faster) Aperture, if it is not used to get to that Shutter Speed then it can be used to leverage a slower ISO or even safer (faster) Shutter Speed, or both.</p>

<p>If arresting the Star's movement is of little concern then F/2.8 is fine. Moreover, if the main subject is night time sky <strong>with star trails</strong>, then wider than 24mm would be a more serious consideration than the lens having a fast aperture.</p>

<p>As mentioned, it depends a lot on what Dinesh means <strong>exactly</strong> when writing: "<em>getting more into night photography</em>"</p>

<p>WW</p>

[dinesh.godavarty]

<p>Ah, thanks guys.</p>

<p>Yes, I already have a very sturdy tripod. The reason I wanted to buy the Rokinon is that they seem to be rated highly in terms of the coma aberration, and people seem very pleased with it. I was planning to use it only for night photography, in the sense of taking landscape shots with the night sky (stars showing up as points, not streaks). </p>

<p>The 16-35 f4 would be my workhorse for all the other "standard" landscape shots (sunrise/sunset/scenes in a forest). I don't need a fast lens as I would typically stop down for these shots. I am also leaning towards a 24-70/25-105 f4 lenses. I am a very stingy guy, so want to minimize the money I spent :)</p>

[mark_ethridge]

The Rokinon lens is very good for night sky photography. I have the Bower branded lens (from what I understand, same

lens made in the same production facility but Amazon had it cheaper than the Rokinon) and I bought it for the same

purpose. Got a chance to use it a couple weeks ago when I took a trip far enough away from city lights. I was very happy

with the results. For the price, it's a real gem!

[adam_mclarsson]

Astrophotography I assume you meant by night

photography? I use a 6D + 24-70mm lens and it is

perfect. Might be worth checking out some prime lenses

too, I find them to be sharper and on a full frame the

detail will be fantastic.