Hmmm...let
Hmmm...let
We're a Canon/Profoto family: five cameras, sixteen lenses, fifteen Profoto lights, too many modifiers.
Could i suggest buying a 1D Mk III instead? i personally had to choose between the 7D and this and finally went all the way to the 1d body. It is amazing and couldnt be happier. Ya cant go wrong with the best canon has to offer. But if Video is what you need then the 7D is a great choice. I would suggest a 17-55 IS in your list as it covers the range of two of those lenses and could save you money for something else. Thanks
I think the 70-200 II with 2X TC is the best option in your budget range. The quality is *way* better than just cropping alone. It
Thanks for the responces. My final decison will be made in a couple months when the new reviews come in. I plan to buy everything at once to get the best deal.Not included in my buget is around $1000 for a decent monopod as well as a tripod, cleaning kit etc. My initial goal is to get the best quality lenses and cover the widest range with the least amount of lenes. I do plan to put UV filters onboth the 24-105 and 70-200 to complete the weather seal.I Here is my reasoning to my choices and sorry if its long
50MM1.4 is chosen as a decent cheap primary lenes. Even though it is 1.4 I know that to get any results 1.8 and above is needed. I figured I needed a low light soultion for around the house and since the 7D has video I figured this would be ample enough, and the 1.4 has manual focus.I don't plan on movies much or use the lens a whole bunch but just wanted that option.
10-22 Is the only wide angle solution I seeasthe 7D is 1.6 and not FF. I did consider the 17-? but just not wide enough for me. I think this will be a fun lens and not concerned that it is not weather proof. Gravy, you bet.
24-105 was picked as this will be my primary carryon lens. I also do some travelling and wanted to carry just one lens. The 17-? and the 24-70 are great but to short for me again. Weather proof and also same filter size as the 70-200 so Isave on buying filters. Having thebonus to use the extender will give me some extra reach when not packing the 70-200. Big feature for me is also his having IS. Pack the 24-105 with the 10-22 and 2EX and on the road I go.
70-200 F2.8 IS II - This is probally Canon`s best zoom lens. Everyone raves about this lens and all reviews and opinions I have read have nothing but praise for the quailty,construction, speed, fast AV and amazing images it captures. If the new 2X III prodces images as the current 1.4X II, I would be more than satisfied.With the 2X III I would have a constant F4.0 and thats where the100-300 and 100-400 start. or above. I do suffer focal length but I believe the 700-200 from 100-200 would exceed the results I would see with the other 2 lenesin the same range. Has IS and againweather sealed.
Primary lens for portraits I feel is not worth buying at this time as I feel I will be shooting very little and could not justfy the cost. For the limited use the 24-105 or even the 50MM will be good enough at this time
Primary macro lens. Only room in the budget for one gravy and decided the 10-22 over the macro.
1D Mk III instead - Did cross my mind but really just over kill for my needs.
I figured this will get my feet on the groud and running and in the future, once I findI need a dedicated lens for either, macro, portraits, orlonger zoom I will explore those options. I do relize there are short comings in any option but went with what I figiured I could live wthout and with. Using th 2EX or 1.4EX will impact image quailty but wil still produce some amazing results that I would be very happy with.
Homer
Originally Posted by Homer
Hi Homer,
I also have a 7D.
The 1.4EX or 2EX, doesn't work with the 24-105 zoom, you need to have at least 70mm on the short end of the zoom like in the 70-200mm for the extender, or at least 135mm for a prime to use the extenders.
FYI the 135mm f/2L accepts the extenders and it's a sweet lens, but it doesn't have weather sealing.
The 2X extender will make the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II into a 140mm-400mm f/5.6 not f/4. You lose two "Full" stops with the 2X and 1 stop with the 1.4X, your are counting partial stops. THe 1.4X will make that lens a 98mm-280mm f/4L. Furthermore, the 1.4EX gives a 50% decrease in AF speed and the 2EX yields a 75% decrease in AF speed..., AF speed is intentionally sacrificed in order to assist AF performance. This AF hit will be the same for the version III extenders.
I still probably wouldn't change much. The 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is awesome. I think your setup is very well thought out. I have all of the same lenses plus a few others, except I don't have the 24-105mm f/4L, I have the 24-70mm f/2.8L instead, but your choice is probably more practical.
Rich
Homer, I have noticed that 50% of your shots will be wildlife and sports, so choosing a right long lens is pretty important to you. 70-200mm2.8II is sure a very nice lens, but it's also very expensive, the IQ from 70-200 2.8 II + 2X TC usually is not acceptable for everybody( to me, the result from 300mm2.8+2X TC is not acceptable most of the time), if you can accept the result then you should accept the result from 70-200mm 2.8 version I right? then why not get 70-200mm 2.8 version I and 400mm 5.6 combo, the costs are almost the same, but you get way better IQ. If you really want that version II zoom, you can still consider the 400mm 5.6 since a mint condition used copy usually cost less than $1000 while a new 2XTC III will cost you $500(TCs III mainly are for version II super telephoto lenses using with 1D body, to take the full advantage of the TCsIII, you need 1D or 1Ds body and new version big white lenses)
another lenses you may consider for indoor sports is the 135mm 2.0 or 85mm 1.8, they both are very good for portraits too and relatively inexpensive.
here is a sample picture I took using 7D+135mm2.0 combo. I posted this picture in this forum before, and just want to show what this combo can do for in door sports, for this kind of lighting condition and speed of action, 7D+135mm 2.0 should be more useful than the 70-200mm2.8
7D, 135mm 2.0, f2.0, 1/2500, ISO 1600
just my 2 cents.
Just to re-emphasize what Rich said, the Canon extenders will not work with either of those two lenses. In your proposed collection, the only lens that would take an extender is the 70-200mm zoom. The reason is that the Canon extenders have a front element that protrudes, so a lens mounted to one must have sufficient open space between the lens mount and the rear element.
As a side note, Rich stated, "you need to have at least 70mm on the short end of the zoom" and while that is currently true for the available L zooms (all the 70-200's take an extender), it is not true for the non-L zooms (e.g. the non-L 70-300mm and 70-300mm DO lenses aren't compatible with Canon extenders), and also it will not be true for the newest L telezoom - the new 70-300mm L will not work with an extender.
Note that there are 3rd party extenders (e.g. Kenko) where some models will work with any lens, including the 24-105mm, but the image quality from those is pretty poor.
So, while it's a nice thought to 'pack the 24-105 with the 10-22 and 2EX', unfortunately it's not going to be that simple. [] This sort of 'problem' is one reason I have a large collection of lenses. For me, a 2-lens kit for least bulk/weight would be 17-55 + 70-300 DO; a 3-lens kit for least bulk/weight would be 10-22 + 24-105 + 70-300 DO. If I can take more bulk, I take the 100-400mm instead of the 70-300mm DO, since the latter is a reasonably large compromise optically (the new 70-300mm L might solve that issue for me).
One more thought - does your original kit include a flash? If you're going to shoot much indoors, you might want to consider something like a 430EX II (I'd stay away from the 270EX) - the 430 pairs will with the slower 24-105mm for some indoor flexibility.
--John
Thanks for clearing that up John.
Rich
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote