Yet more DSLR questions (especially for the Canon users amongst you)
In all honesty if you are going to stick pants glass on it, don't get the 5D II 😉 I run mine with:
The 28-135 is just a bit too shonky, though it wasn't too bad on the 5D I (which I have stuck it back onto as a riding camera).
Just bought a Sigma 24mm f1.8 Macro though which I am having a fair bit of fun with at the moment. My wish list is to get an ultra wide prime, the Canon 85mm f1.8, and probably something like the Sigma 300mm f2.8 and the teles for when I want something with a bit more reach on it!
If you want full frame, but aren't going to splash on the glass, then look out the old 1D series beasts or a second hand 5D mk I. The mk II is better than the original 5D, but both are pretty exceptional.
Some of the Sigma zooms from the posh range can be very good too, and would suit either the old or new 5D.
Face it though, it aint going to be cheap either way 😉Posted 8 years agosamuriMember
get the sigma 17-70 f2.8
Beautiful lens for the moneyPosted 8 years ago
personally i'd say that spending money on an expensive camera body and skimping on glass is getting it so wrong…
Having had the weekend to play with the 5D MkII with my lenses, and an (also borrowed) L-series 24-70, I have to report that my Tamron SPs and Olympus Zuikos are more than up to the task when zoomed to 100 % on a 24" monitor. Taking the same photos with the same lenses (my Zuiko 50 mm 1.4 @ f2.8 and the Canon-L @ 50mm f2.8) on both cameras, the biggest difference is made by the camera body in this case – if anything, I prefer the Zuiko glass (although it's the prime vs zoom argument there). I'm sure a bag of L-series lenses would be nice, but both weight and price wise (to replace the manual lenses I use with Canon L-series), I'd be looking at over £10,000 to replace a lot of carefully selected 2nd hand glass that cost me £200 in all! So £1800 for a 5D MkII, with about £300 from the 450D on fleabay seems by far the cheaper step up…
Back to my question, I'm only after such a lens for the rare occasion when i'm either in a rush, can only take one lens (and a prime isn't flexible enough), or when I'm not the one using the camera…Posted 8 years ago
I would probably be looking at the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 in that case.
It's about half the price of the Canon 24-105, but without sacrificing too much (assuming you get a good one). The construction of the Sigma 24 prime I bought t'other day is not up to posh Canon standards, but does seem a step up from the consumer grade stuff, and I can't complain with the results thus far (not used in anger yet, just pissing about in town on Saturday).
Keep thinking of getting a convertor and some old Zukio lenses as I used to love them on the OM 35mm stuff, but I keep getting sidelined with lust for the new Zeiss kit in EOS mount 🙂
I would seriously look into an old 5D mk I though – they can be had for decent money and give absolutely sublime results in themselves (and have the advantages of not needing quite such large memory cards, and having spare batteries available in the shops!). If you are looking to save money then I would be swayed more towards that body and the 24-105L than the newer body and a cheaper lens (the 24-105 is probably the ultimate walk around lens, it really is very, very nice indeed)Posted 8 years ago
Having just had the luxury of playing with a Canon EOS 5D MkII for the weekend, I'm sadly hooked, and it looks like I will splash the cash. Part of the deal is that I sell my 450D in the process, and as its standard 18-55mm EF-S lens won't fit the 5D, that'll go too.
As I shoot with olympus OM-fit manual lenses and an adapter, the loss of the cheap EF-S lens isn't that great an issue, up until when I just need to shoot fast and need AF (or the gf wants a go). Having decided a while back that modern lenses are all too expensive, I know very little about them, but could do with a cheapish say 28-80 + mild macro zoom to fill in this gap. What is there out there in canon-fit mode. Really doesn't have to be much above bargain basement as I doubt I'll take important photos with it, but it may be useful to still have the option.
I know the f1.8 50mm prime is the obvious option, but the ability to zoom would be nice, as I do most of my shooting with primes, so the 'quick and easy' option of AF and zoom is desirable…
Basically costing up the 'hidden extras' (such as new memory cards) and this lens before I dive in (or work out I can't really afford it after all)…Posted 8 years ago
Cheers for the advice. I know it's not great, but spending £2k on a body i'll use for every photo vs several multiples of that on lenses that by definition won't be used as much as the body doesn't make that much sense to me, hence why I'm happy to sacrifice AF in most cases (I usually shoot macro or landscape, so would hardly use AF anyway) for the old, light, yet still very high quality and astoundingly cheap OM kit i'm using. The only reason I'm after a 'modern' lens at all is to have the flexibility to pass the camera to someone else and know they can get a fool-proof decent shot, or I'm travelling light and know i'll need the flexibility. The ideal solution would be the 28-300L, but that's far too much, and then I'd probably never use all my other lenses through laziness 😉
Just how shonky is that 28-135? There's even this at Ffordes for ultimate bargain-basement zoomery. I know it's a huge compromise, compared to a decent lens, but stopped down to f8 and mid zoom, how bad can it be?Posted 8 years ago
It's just about okay – I used it on an EOS 3 first where it was great, but with the increasing resolution (on both the 5D and then 5D II) you just start noticing softness creeping in, especially at the edges, and chromatic abberations all over the shop. I think it has only been on the MkII once!Posted 8 years ago
I would add though – the MkII is absolutely savage on lens quality, there is just such high resolution that if there are any weaknesses they are laid bare (the Sigma 24mm prime has some fairly noticeable fringing going on, though that is easy enough to deal with in Lightroom). Just can't afford to get all the primes I want in L glass or Zeiss!!! Youch!Posted 8 years agodoogeMember
I agree with Jam-bo totally. It seems pointless buying a 5DmkII body to run any cheap lens, even if its a lens to have as an all in one. I wouldnt go for a Sigma lens. If you want to make the most out of the body, you need L series lenses. If you want one of the best full frame portrait bodies on the market it would be wasted on a third party lens. They are ok, but are never as sharp, clear, saturated and you get problems such as fringing, barrel distortion and soft edges.
I would say if you need a 28-80mm get a mega cheap canon own plastic 28-80mm F4.5-5.6 from a 35mm EOS body for the mean time, then upgrade later. It just seems a shame to use such a nice body with a naff lens (your Zuiko lenses are arnt naff, they are brilliant – referring to Sigma and Tamron lenses) I would try and get hold of the 24-105mm F4 L or the 24-70mm F2.8 L as they are both very good.
The other option is to go to prime lenses – 28mm F1.8, 50mm F1.8 and eventually an 85mm F1.8. All are good lenses when used at a couple of stops above their extreme apertures. But, I am recommending these without knowing what you have already in terms or lenses?Posted 8 years ago
Dooge, current lenses are:
Canon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS EF-S (no use for 5D as for cropped sensor)
Sigma DL Hyperzoom 28-300mm f3.5-6.3 (Doesn't work correctly on either the 450D of 5D MkII – its the original lens off my EOS 300 film)
Olympus Zuiko f3.5 28mm
Olympus Zuiko f1.4 40mm
Olympus Zuiko f3.5 135mm
Tamron SP f2.5 90mm macro
Tamron SP f8 500mm cat
Tamron f3.8-4 80-210mm zoom (not used very often – free from my dad)
Tamron SP 2x teleconverter
(The Tamron SPs aren't naff by the way – they were designed to directly compete with Canon, Oly and Nikon at the pro level)
It is these manual lenses I shoot with the most by a long way, but there are the odd occasions (such as my PhD graduation last week) where I either need very quick photos or need someone else to take the shots. In these instances manual focus is useless as by the time you've done it, you've missed it, and it seems even my dad's lost the knack of manual focussing even though one was his own lens! So basically, for these rare occasions I want a lens that will simply outperform a compact, nothing more! I.e. to take a reasonable but in-focus and correctly exposed pic with a cheap auto lens would be better than an out of focus, poorly exposed pic with a good manual lens. If I could afford it, I'd keep the 450D for the purpose (and may still do), but as it's still pretty new, they do fetch a reasonable amount on fleabay…
So yes, a super-cheap ex-low-end EOS film lens would suffice for this purpose I guess. I just wondered if anyone knew of any 'hidden gems' that I may get 2nd hand for a reasonable price?Posted 8 years agostumpy01Member
For the situation you outline as being the main use for this lens on the expensive body, would you not just be better off getting a half decent compact and using that?
I always find that if I give my SLR to people to take some snaps they immediately assume they can't use it as it's a 'proper' camera, even in full auto.Posted 8 years ago
People are also bamboozled by having to use the viewfinder (although does the new 5D have live view?)
But, give someone a £150 compact and they will shoot away all day.
The topic ‘Yet more DSLR questions (especially for the Canon users amongst you)’ is closed to new replies.