Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Lens dilemma, seeking advice

  1. #11
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    5,565
    Canon 5DMKIV
    Canon 24-105 f4L II
    Canon 35 1.4L II
    Canon 16-35 F4 (just purchased)
    Canon 70-300L
    Canon 100 F2.8 L


    My most basic advice is that is a nice line up. You now own it. Shoot with it and see what you use and like. I tend to reassess my kit each winter and then shoot with it for the next year to see what I like and do not like and adjust my kit the following year. I would recommend something similar. You had reasons for buying each of these lenses. You own them. Shoot with them for awhile and see what you like using, what you do not end up using much at all, and what holes do you have that need filled.

    Also, for every shot I can see you "gaining" by going to the 16-35 III, I can see you losing the same or more shots by selling off the 35 II and losing IS from the 16-35 f/4 IS. Sometimes reshuffling the deck is just that, no net gain.

    As for the initial assessment, I can see keeping all three, especially if you end up liking the 35 mm focal length, as they each serve a purpose:

    • The 24-105 II is your general purpose zoom. I replaced Mark I with the 24-70 II and it is, by far, my most used lens. BTW, was this a kit lens? I didn't think Mark 2 was out?
    • The 35 f/1.4 II will give the wide aperture, low light, best IQ, blue-goo, limited distortion, bokeh, and easy has the best vignetting at each respective aperture (f2.8 or f/4). People might argue that vignetting can be corrected in post, but if you already shot at ISO3200, and you pay a 3 stop push penalty in the corners, the correction is noticeable, IMO.
    • The 16-35 f/4 IS is your UWA lens that can also serve as a wider general purpose zoom. I am constantly switching between the 16-35 f/4 and the 24-70 II for waterfalls and other landscapes. Both are excellent and very nice to have.


    I can see people selecting the 16-35 VIII for indoor event shooting and starscapes. But it has pretty significant vignetting at f/2.8 and almost the same vignetting at f/4 as the 16-35 f/4 IS. I am sure this will be an excellent lens, but the vignetting will affect starscapes, it is also bigger/heavier and you loose IS.

    My last thought, regarding the 50 mm discussion. The Canon Store tends to have some good refurbished sales after the "holiday return" season. You could probably pick up a 50 f/1.4 for a very nice price. I've owned it and f/2.8 and up, it is near perfection. f/2 is very good. f/1.4, not so much. But for not much money, you would be able to see what you think about 50 mm focal length on FF.
    Last edited by Kayaker72; 11-05-2016 at 03:08 PM.

  2. #12
    Senior Member Photog82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Maine, USA
    Posts
    321
    I've had some time to think and experiment. I am going to keep the 16-35 f/4; it's a really nice lens- not perfect for astro great for landscapes (hoping to get some really good winter shots this year) and I even used it well for a portrait session to bring out the setting for 2 scenes. I'm also going to keep the 35 1.4 II; I've used it a bit for family gatherings, portraits and am starting to get used to using it for those certain situations.

    One thing that I'm still debating on is the 24-105II vs 24-70II. The 24-105 fits my landscape needs when I don't want UWA and has the zoom I sometimes need and the 24-70 has that low aperture for inside shots of family gatherings, portraits, etc. I could use it for landscapes but no IS and the shorter range is a downer. I've read so many reviews where people have replaced their 24-105 with the 24-70 as their walk around lens but everyone uses lenses differently.

    I may table to 24-70 for awhile and put the $ towards the 85 1.2II (or do I want to wait for the rumored 85 1.4? wish it were the 85 1.2 III).

    It's concerning when you put all of your assets into Excel and tally up everything with what you have already.
    Last edited by Photog82; 12-04-2016 at 04:18 AM.
    --

  3. #13
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    5,565
    Quote Originally Posted by Photog82 View Post
    I've had some time to think and experiment. I am going to keep the 16-35 f/4; it's a really nice lens- not perfect for astro great for landscapes (hoping to get some really good winter shots this year)
    I picked up the Rokinon 14 f/2.8 UMC for astro and UWA (before I had the EF 16-35 f/4 IS). I would recommend buying two copies from someone with a good return policy. I and a friend have now both done this. In both instances, one was incredibly sharp and the other, very poor. Great lens when you get a good one (significant distortion, but sharp optics). Very poor quality control by Rokinon. At least two years ago. I am waiting to see more about the Samyang "XP" 14 mm that was recently announced.

    Quote Originally Posted by Photog82 View Post
    It's concerning when you put all of your assets into Excel and tally up everything with what you have already.
    Yeah....the list gets long. I started in 2010 and have infused some cash every year. Amazing how quickly that amasses into something significant.

    All I can say is make sure they are insured. Mine are on a rider to my home owners insurance.

  4. #14
    Senior Member neuroanatomist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    3,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Kayaker72 View Post
    I picked up the Rokinon 14 f/2.8 UMC for astro and UWA (before I had the EF 16-35 f/4 IS). I would recommend buying two copies from someone with a good return policy. I and a friend have now both done this. In both instances, one was incredibly sharp and the other, very poor. Great lens when you get a good one (significant distortion, but sharp optics). Very poor quality control by Rokinon.
    Second time was the charm for me, first one was badly decentered (one corner was total mush).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •